appointment to a committee by President

[Guest Dan D.]

Hi All

The President is setting up a By-Law committee. He/she wants to appoint a person to this committee that is not on the Board of Directors but a member of the organization.

The President feels that outside views, besides those of the Board of Directors, would be a good thing. 

 

[Guest Dan D.]

Is this legal or not

[Gary Novosielski]

There is no rule in RONR that prohibits committee membership by outside individuals.

The question of whether committee member appointmenet falls within the powers of the president must be answered by consulting your bylaws.

[Hieu H. Huynh]

3 hours ago, Guest Dan D. said:

Hi All

The President is setting up a By-Law committee. He/she wants to appoint a person to this committee that is not on the Board of Directors but a member of the organization.

The President feels that outside views, besides those of the Board of Directors, would be a good thing.

How was this committee established?

[J. J.]

4 hours ago, Guest Dan D. said:

Is this legal or not

If this is a committee of the board, I think the president would need the approval of the board (though I can see the other side).  If it is a committee of the society as a whole, then the president could appoint the person who is a member of the society, but not on the board.

[Greg Goodwiller, PRP]

RONR states (beginning on page 174, at line 31):

NAMING MEMBERS TO A SPECIAL COMMITTEE. A standing or special committee may include, or even have as its chairman, one or more persons who are not members of the assembly or the society; but if the chair appoints the committee, the names of all such nonmembers being appointed must be submitted to the assembly for approval, unless the bylaws or the motion to appoint the committee specifically authorizes the presiding officer to appoint nonmembers.

 

[Gary Novosielski]

1 hour ago, Greg Goodwiller said:

RONR states (beginning on page 174, at line 31):

NAMING MEMBERS TO A SPECIAL COMMITTEE. A standing or special committee may include, or even have as its chairman, one or more persons who are not members of the assembly or the society; but if the chair appoints the committee, the names of all such nonmembers being appointed must be submitted to the assembly for approval, unless the bylaws or the motion to appoint the committee specifically authorizes the presiding officer to appoint nonmembers.

 

Oh, yeah.

[Rev Ed]

2 hours ago, Greg Goodwiller said:

RONR states (beginning on page 174, at line 31):

NAMING MEMBERS TO A SPECIAL COMMITTEE. A standing or special committee may include, or even have as its chairman, one or more persons who are not members of the assembly or the society; but if the chair appoints the committee, the names of all such nonmembers being appointed must be submitted to the assembly for approval, unless the bylaws or the motion to appoint the committee specifically authorizes the presiding officer to appoint nonmembers.

 

But that would not stop the President from appointing a general member to this Committee.

[J. J.]

11 minutes ago, Rev Ed said:

But that would not stop the President from appointing a general member to this Committee.

If the "assembly" is the board in this case, it would.  If this is a committee is one of the board, the president would need the board's permission to add any one who is not a member of the board.

[Greg Goodwiller, PRP]

2 hours ago, J. J. said:

If the "assembly" is the board in this case, it would.  If this is a committee is one of the board, the president would need the board's permission to add any one who is not a member of the board.

I wish RONR at this point said something more like, "the assembly, board or committee to which the committee being appointed belongs or reports." But as it doesn't, this is my interpretation of its meaning as well.

[Rev Ed]

On 8/22/2017 at 2:22 PM, J. J. said:

If the "assembly" is the board in this case, it would.  If this is a committee is one of the board, the president would need the board's permission to add any one who is not a member of the board.

But, it talks about "non-members" not what type of "non-members".  It's how you choose to interpret the term "non-members".  Just because the Committee reports to the Board does not, necessarily, mean that non-members of the Board cannot be appointed by the President as I read "non-members" from page 174 to mean "non-members" of the Society.  And we would have to also look at past history of the organization.  If the custom is for the President to appoint anyone, Board member or general member, to a Committee, it is the custom that would have to be changed, not the people the President is appointing. 

[J. J.]

1 hour ago, Rev Ed said:

But, it talks about "non-members" not what type of "non-members".  It's how you choose to interpret the term "non-members".  Just because the Committee reports to the Board does not, necessarily, mean that non-members of the Board cannot be appointed by the President as I read "non-members" from page 174 to mean "non-members" of the Society.  And we would have to also look at past history of the organization.  If the custom is for the President to appoint anyone, Board member or general member, to a Committee, it is the custom that would have to be changed, not the people the President is appointing. 

The question is, "Members of what?"

A board is a type of assembly, as defined in RONR (p. 5, ll. 13-18).  So we have two types of assemblies, the "the assembly of an organized society" and the board.  We do not know which one is appointing this committee, but normally, both could.  Each of these assemblies have separate membership (in theory, the members of each committee not even overlap).

If the "assembly of an organized society" authorizes someone to appoint members of a given committee, then the person selecting the committee, would have to choose from members of that assembly, the "the assembly of an organized society," unless that assembly permits the selector to appoint people that are not "the assembly of an organized society."

if a board authorizes someone to appoint members of a given committee, then the person selecting the committee, would have to choose from members of the assembly that creating the committee would have to choose from members of that assembly, the board, unless that assembly permits the selector to appoint people that are not board members.

 

[Rev Ed]

On 8/26/2017 at 3:16 PM, J. J. said:

The question is, "Members of what?"

A board is a type of assembly, as defined in RONR (p. 5, ll. 13-18).  So we have two types of assemblies, the "the assembly of an organized society" and the board.  We do not know which one is appointing this committee, but normally, both could.  Each of these assemblies have separate membership (in theory, the members of each committee not even overlap).

If the "assembly of an organized society" authorizes someone to appoint members of a given committee, then the person selecting the committee, would have to choose from members of that assembly, the "the assembly of an organized society," unless that assembly permits the selector to appoint people that are not "the assembly of an organized society."

if a board authorizes someone to appoint members of a given committee, then the person selecting the committee, would have to choose from members of the assembly that creating the committee would have to choose from members of that assembly, the board, unless that assembly permits the selector to appoint people that are not board members.

 

But J.J., page 174 talks about non-members being people who or not members of "the assembly or the society".  The phrase "or the society" would mean that general, non-Board, members can be appointed to a Committee by the President, without Board approval.  If that were not the case, then RONR would not include the "or the society" clause.

[Richard Brown]

I'm not able to look at RONR right now to read the entire provision in context, but based on what he quoted, I think Rev Ed has a point.

[Guest Who's Coming to Dinner]

And yet Page 485 tells us that "the executive board usually divides itself into committees…" [emphasis added].

[Richard Brown]

27 minutes ago, Guest Who's Coming to Dinner said:

And yet Page 485 tells us that "the executive board usually divides itself into committees…" [emphasis added].

So? What does that have to do with the price of tea? 

[Rev Ed]

31 minutes ago, Guest Who's Coming to Dinner said:

And yet Page 485 tells us that "the executive board usually divides itself into committees…" [emphasis added].

If you read the whole section you are discussing (page 485 line 30 to page 486 line 9), this does not include Standing Committees, and is where the Board is essentially allowing those Committees to do some of the work of the organization on behalf of the Board. 

Although pages 495 and 496 suggests that non-assembly members should be appointed by the President with approval from the specific assembly as J.J. states.  As such, I stand corrected.

[Gary c Tesser]

On 8/29/2017 at 11:06 PM, Rev Ed said:

lthough pages 495 and 496 suggests that non-assembly members should be appointed by the President with approval from the specific assembly as J.J. states.  As such, I stand corrected

I don't think you do:  I think you are thoroughly correct.  Good work, Mr Ed.

(... until I stand corrected.)

[Richard Brown]

On 8/29/2017 at 6:11 PM, Rev Ed said:

But J.J., page 174 talks about non-members being people who or not members of "the assembly or the society".  The phrase "or the society" would mean that general, non-Board, members can be appointed to a Committee by the President, without Board approval.  If that were not the case, then RONR would not include the "or the society" clause.

 

On 8/29/2017 at 10:06 PM, Rev Ed said:

If you read the whole section you are discussing (page 485 line 30 to page 486 line 9), this does not include Standing Committees, and is where the Board is essentially allowing those Committees to do some of the work of the organization on behalf of the Board. 

Although pages 495 and 496 suggests that non-assembly members should be appointed by the President with approval from the specific assembly as J.J. states.  As such, I stand corrected.

 

21 minutes ago, Gary c Tesser said:

I don't think you do:  I think you are thoroughly correct.  Good work, Mr Ed.

(... until I stand corrected.)

1

I'm with Gary Tesser.  I think Rev Ed got it right the first time.  I believe the language on pages 174-175 and also page 492 make plain that permission of the assembly is needed only when the person being appointed is not a member of the assembly OR THE SOCIETY.

From pages 174-175:  "A standing or special committee may include, or even have as its chairman, one or more persons who are not members of the assembly or the society; but if the chair appoints the committee, the names of all such nonmembers being [page 175] appointed must be submitted to the assembly for approval, unless the bylaws or the motion to appoint the committee specifically authorizes the presiding officer to appoint nonmembers (see also pp. 492–93, 495–96)."

From page 492: "It is possible for persons who are not members of the assembly or the society to be appointed to committees—even to the position of committee chairman—but control over each such appointment is reserved to the assembly in the individual case."

The bottom of page 492 and top of 493 further say that "When method (d) is used and the chair appoints either a standing or a special committee, however, the governing rule regarding the appointment of [page 493] non–assembly members is as stated under Naming Members to a Special Committee, on pages 174–75. "  (Emphasis added).

There are a couple of instances in which RONR refers simply to non members of the assembly, but, taken as a whole, it seems to me that approval of the assembly is needed only when appointing someonen who is not a member of EITHER the assembly or the society.

I think Rev Ed got it right the first time.

 

[Gary c Tesser]

Yes, it's nice to give a Canad some credit once in a while.

[Gary c Tesser]

(Geez Richard, get some sleap!)

[Gary c Tesser]

(C'mon, I've been the Overnight Officer for this, The World's Premiere INternet Parliamentary Forum (soi disant, I confess, if only to give Tom something else to look up again) for maybe fifteen years now.  So geez, Richard, get some sleap!

(Rhymes with "sheap"))

[Dan Honemann]

I think J.J. has it right.

If a board authorizes its presiding officer to appoint members of a given committee (use, for this purpose, the example on pp. 178-79), the presiding officer will have to appoint members of the board unless the board (or a provision in the bylaws) permits him to appoint persons who are not board members. 

The clearest statement of the rule is found on page 496:

“When the chair appoints a committee, no vote is taken on the appointees, except any who are not members of the assembly in cases where there is no prior authorization for the chair to appoint non–assembly members to the committee—either in the bylaws or in a motion directing the appointment of the particular committee (see also pp. 174–75).”

At a meeting of the board, the "assembly" referred to is the board's assembly.

The rules with respect to appointment of nonmembers to committees first appeared, I believe, in the 9^th Edition, and until this discussion appeared I did not think that there was any ambiguity in what is said on pages 174-75, but it now appears that there is.