Executive Session

[Rev Ed]

I have a question with regards to a difference between the 10th and 11th Edtions of RONR. Pages 92-93 of the 10th Edtion, with regards to Executive Session, state: "In most organizations, except those operating under the lodge system, by practicse or sometimes, by rule, membership meetings are open to the public, but board or committee meetings are customarily held in executive session."

The emphasis is mine, and my question is this: Does anyone know the rationale why the part about Boards customarily holding meetings in Executive Session was removed in the 11th Edition? Of course if the custom to do so was started unther the 10th Edition, Board meetings would still normally be held in Executve Session by custom as the 11th Edition allows for this (page 95 ll 26-27.)

[Guest Edgar]

Does anyone know the rationale why the part about Boards customarily holding meetings in Executive Session was removed in the 11th Edition?

I suspect there is little hard evidence as to what (most) boards customarily do. Nor does the general case matter in particular instances.

So it might be better to ask, but only rhetorically, why it was in the 10th Edition, and not why it's not in the 11th.

[Guest Hannah]

I have a question related to this one. If an national organization's constitution does not specifically state the there is an "executive board" does one exist simply because the national board (NB) says it does. I am asking because the NB of an organization of which I am a member, routinely holds "executive board" sessions which are only open to the elected officers, appointed chairs, and past presidents. These sessions are not open to the general membership and the minutes of those meetings are made available only to those who are permitted to attend. Following this executive board meeting, typically the next day, there is a meeting that is open to all members as defined in the constitution. The reason that is usually given for this closed session is so that "dirty laundry isn't washed in public". Again, there is no mention of an executive board in the national constitution.

[Gary c Tesser]

...

Guest Hannah, does the constitution at least provide for the national board (NB)? Robert's Rules does point out that there are variations on the names that an organization can attach to its board. These names include "executive board," like "board of directors" or "board of trustees." If that is the group that is meeting as the "executive board," then all's well. On the other hand, if some group is ad hoc getting together, including at whim the "elected officers, appointed chairs, and past presidents" and maybe the rhododendron on the wall, then yes, you might ask by what authority. If they're gathering for drinks, then who cares? But if they're purporting to act for the organization, then they need to justify their authority, or be held to account.

(Nothing to add about Ed's question, but nice to see it.)

[George Mervosh]

She might be referring to an executive committee (RONR, p. 485) which cannot be appointed without bylaws authorization.

[Dan Honemann]

I have a question with regards to a difference between the 10th and 11th Edtions of RONR. Pages 92-93 of the 10th Edtion, with regards to Executive Session, state: "In most organizations, except those operating under the lodge system, by practicse or sometimes, by rule, membership meetings are open to the public, but board or committee meetings are customarily held in executive session."

The emphasis is mine, and my question is this: Does anyone know the rationale why the part about Boards customarily holding meetings in Executive Session was removed in the 11th Edition? Of course if the custom to do so was started unther the 10th Edition, Board meetings would still normally be held in Executve Session by custom as the 11th Edition allows for this (page 95 ll 26-27.)

The sentence to which you refer (which appeared in both the 9th and 10th editions) does not appear in the 11th because, although it was nothing other than a statement of fact, many readers mistook it to be a rule of some sort. I think that it is an accurate statement of fact (I went out and counted them all one day just to make sure), but it was never intended to be taken as a rule.

[Guest Donna]

can a member participate in an excutive session if they are not in the room but viewing the meeting by web-conference?

[Guest Edgar]

can a member participate in an excutive session if they are not in the room but viewing the meeting by web-conference?

Such absentee participation must be explicitly authorized by the bylaws (or some superior rule or law), otherwise it's prohibited by RONR.

And the fact that the meeting might be held in executive session is irrelevant.

And, for future reference, please post your new questions as new topics (even if you find a similar topic already posted). This forum works best that way.