Dfredc

Chairman abuse of authority

40 posts in this topic

On 9/3/2017 at 8:22 PM, Richard Brown said:

I don't think that's exactly right. you don't declare the chair vacant if the chair is the regular elected presiding officer. That procedure is used only when the presiding officer is an appointed or elected chair pro tem. In all other cases , the assembly must suspend the rules to take away from the chairman the authority to preside during all or part of a given session. I explained that procedure in an earlier post.

See page 651 line 16 through page 653 line 19.

 

This all has been very helpful, Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/4/2017 at 10:10 AM, Joshua Katz said:

 Was the resignation accepted?

I would like an answer to this as well. It may well be that the chair was correct that this person was still a member of the board, and he may even have been correct that the appeal was dilatory.

I am more concerned about the chair canceling the meeting to remove the member, but it does not seem that this was the subject of the appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/4/2017 at 8:10 AM, Joshua Katz said:

 Was the resignation accepted?

There is some debate about this. The body who elected the officer who resigned is the assembly rather than the board. The board did enter the resignation into the minutes, and the chairman announced the resignation to the assembly via email and scheduled a special meeting to elect a new officer of his choice. However, he then canceled the special election meeting and announced that the officer's resignation was rescinded, also via email, nearly a month after the resignation. The reason for this maneuver had to do with the board's action to remove him, which requires a 2/3 vote via the bylaws. His last-second rescinding of the officer's resignation led to him squeaking by that 2/3 vote. Attempts to question his ruling on the rescinding of the resignation were ruled dilatory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, it took so long to get back.

But John Law above ^^^ has filled you in correctly with the information. I might add that historical precedent of the organization has been that the board has always accepted a resignation, then the Chair would announce to the assembly the resignation and the call for a special election to elect a replacement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dfredc said:

Sorry, it took so long to get back.

But John Law above ^^^ has filled you in correctly with the information. I might add that historical precedent of the organization has been that the board has always accepted a resignation, then the Chair would announce to the assembly the resignation and the call for a special election to elect a replacement.

Based on these facts, the chair was correct to rule that the individual in question was still a member of the board, and was also correct to rule that the appeal was dilatory. A resignation may be unilaterally withdrawn up until the question on accepting the resignation has been stated by the chair, during a meeting of the body with the power to accept the vacancy. Since the membership fills the vacancy, the membership also has the power to accept the resignation, unless the bylaws expressly provide otherwise. There cannot be two reasonable opinions on this question, so an appeal is dilatory. The organization's custom on this matter is not sufficient. If the organization wishes for the membership to fill vacancies, but for the board to accept resignations, it will be necessary to amend the bylaws.

See FAQ #18 and RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 467-468, 342, 19.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now I am confused. Another poster here says, " When the resignation was announced to the membership and a special election to fill the vacancy was called, the membership, in effect, accepted the resignation, even though there was no formal vote taken to accept it. "

So which is it?

#18 that you cited says, " it may not be withdrawn without permission of the assembly once it has been placed before the assembly for its approval ". Does 'placing it before the assembly' have to be done at a meeting, or can it be done via email when a special election to replace the resigned officer is called?

Not that it probably matters, but our organization has never voted to accept a resignation as long as I have been a part of it. That acceptance has always been implied and then a special election has been held to replace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, John Law said:

Well now I am confused. Another poster here says, " When the resignation was announced to the membership and a special election to fill the vacancy was called, the membership, in effect, accepted the resignation, even though there was no formal vote taken to accept it. "

I'm more confused.  I can't find that response anywhere. Just read Mr.Martin's reply.......life is simpler that way.

Edited by George Mervosh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, George Mervosh said:

I'm more confused.  I can't find that response anywhere. Just read Mr.Martin's reply.......life is simpler that way.

I read the reply, which is greatly appreciated. I also read the reply in this thread, which I quoted above:
 

They seem to be conflicting, so I am just asking for some possible clarification. Thank you for the help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, John Law said:

I read the reply, which is greatly appreciated. I also read the reply in this thread, which I quoted above:
 

They seem to be conflicting, so I am just asking for some possible clarification. Thank you for the help.

I don't see a conflict.  Just two sets of facts, generating two different replies (by Messrs. Lages and Martin).  Which is exactly why our moderator Mr. Gerber recommends starting a new thread (like you did) instead of adding onto an old one.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, George Mervosh said:

I don't see a conflict.  Just two sets of facts, generating two different replies (by Messrs. Lages and Martin).  Which is exactly why our moderator Mr. Gerber recommends starting a new thread (like you did) instead of adding onto an old one.  

I can definitely see the value in starting a new thread. However, Mr. Lages was clearly responding to the same person who started this thread, with the same circumstances, and giving a different answer. Maybe it would be better just to get an explanation on my clarifying question above regarding FAQ 18b? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, John Law said:

I can definitely see the value in starting a new thread. However, Mr. Lages was clearly responding to the same person who started this thread, with the same circumstances, and giving a different answer. Maybe it would be better just to get an explanation on my clarifying question above regarding FAQ 18b? Thanks.

I suspect that Mr. Lages assumed that the resignation was "announced" at a meeting of the membership. Based on the facts in this thread, my understanding is that this was not the case.

4 hours ago, John Law said:

#18 that you cited says, " it may not be withdrawn without permission of the assembly once it has been placed before the assembly for its approval ". Does 'placing it before the assembly' have to be done at a meeting, or can it be done via email when a special election to replace the resigned officer is called?

Not that it probably matters, but our organization has never voted to accept a resignation as long as I have been a part of it. That acceptance has always been implied and then a special election has been held to replace.

It must be done at a meeting. The assembly cannot act outside of a meeting, and so nothing may be placed before it outside of a meeting. In fact, there technically is no "assembly" outside of a meeting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting indeed. I would say some clarifying needs to be done in our by-laws then (same organization as John Law). In which case it changes the challenge in our current circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Loading...