Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Punishment Phase after a Trial


Guest Juan

Recommended Posts

A member of our club was charged and found guilty of an offense and a bylaw violation less than 1 year ago.  The disciplinary action included a 1 year probation.  6 month's later the same member violates another bylaw and also violates his terms of probation and a trail was held for the 2nd incursion. The Board of Trustees has voted with a yes (guilty) that the member of our club violated the club bylaws, in addition he / she violated the terms of the probation.  At the next Board meeting (Sentencing Phase) a motion was made to Suspend the member but it failed to get a 2/3rd's Board vote (yes).  Some board members then wanted to lessen the disciplinary action to see if they could get some form of punishment handed out but due to time constraints the sentencing phase was tabled and will be brought back up at the next board meeting 1 month away.

 

Is this allowed?  Can a Board just keep making motions on punishments until they finally get a majority vote to hand out disciplinary action or is that considered double jeopardy.  They had their chance the vote was no and when they ended the meeting isn't the disciplinary phase is over??  Can they continue this process meeting after meeting making motions on punishments until they get what they want??

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing in RONR prohibits a postponement in disciplinary proceedings.  It seems to me that if the assembly defeated a motion to suspend the  member, a lesser penalty can be moved and voted on, just as a lesser charge could be. RONR 11th ed, p 667, lines 25-30.

 

This is not like a criminal proceeding where double jeopardy might attach, but there could be legal ramifications due to multiple attempts at imposing a penalty.  For that, you need to consult with an attorney.  Nothing in  RONR prohibits  it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would tend to opine that (possible legal issues aside) the Board is permitted to spend as much time as it would like attempting motions for different punishments until one reaches a majority, and postponing it as long as they would like.

 

Doing it otherwise opens things up for abuse. For instance, if you only allow one motion to propose a punishment to be considered, a board member sympathetic to the accused could move a punishment he knows is unacceptable, and then if this is voted down, the matter is considered closed. Similarly, if you didn't allow postponement, they could strategically attempt to avoid a vote on the motion, or bust quorum, in order to kill the motion permanently.

 

Assuming that your disciplinary proceedings proceed as in RONR (and if your bylaws provide for disciplinary proceedings, they don't!), then I would say that the right of the assembly to impose a punishment ends when it actually chooses to impose one and the motion can no longer be reconsidered, or if it specifically adopts a motion to impose no punishment (some might argue that this is out of order, but I think it is not because it has the effect of ending the right to punish) and this motion cannot be reconsidered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 ... a motion was made to Suspend the member but it failed to get a 2/3rd's Board vote (yes). .......

 

.... until they finally get a majority vote to hand out disciplinary action ...

 

Juan, why the discrepancy?  -- And, do your organization's rules prescribe a 2/3 vote for any penalty less than expulsion?  RONR's rules do not (p. 668, top).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Juan, why the discrepancy?  -- And, do your organization's rules prescribe a 2/3 vote for any penalty less than expulsion?  RONR's rules do not (p. 668, top).

Hmmm.  Good catch.  I thought the same thing yesterday when I posted and almost said the same thing, but didn't say it because I re-read the original post and thought it said that their rules do require a two thirds vote to suspend a member.  But, upon re-reading it  again this morning, it clearly doesn't say that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm.  Good catch.  I thought the same thing yesterday when I posted and almost said the same thing, but didn't say it because I re-read the original post and thought it said that their rules do require a two thirds vote to suspend a member.  But, upon re-reading it  again this morning, it clearly doesn't say that.

 

Yeah.  Thanks.  It clearly says something, but it doesn't clearly say what it says.  Which is why I asked.  Guest Juan, come back!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Sorry was away on vacation.  Our bylaws state a 2/3 majority must vote in the affirmative to suspend or expel.  Other (lesser) punishments can be handed out with just a majority (affirmation) vote.  It appears from the comments above that more motions can be made in regard to punishments and voted on until a yes vote is finally made whether it takes 1 meeting or 15++

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...