Voting off president

[Guest Bobby]

I am a member of a small hockey organization. At our last board meeting, a motion was made to remove the president from the board. The motion was seconded and the vote took place requiring 2/3 vote by the board. Mistakes were made. First, there were 8 sitting members including president. She did not vote. When the votes were read there were 5 for and 2 against the motion. Which gave us the 2/3 needed. We thought. The vote was not disputed by the president and she walked out. 1 hour later she sent an email to the entire membership stating she was no longer their president. 1 week later we received a letter from an attorney stating the vote is null and void because she should of been allowed to vote. She has returned as if nothing happened and refuses to meet to discuss the letter. Can she do this without a vote to void what happened and is there anything that the board can do at this point. 

[jstackpo]

Did the president not vote ("abstain") of her own free will, or was she told (in error, most likely) that she could not vote at the meeting on the motion to remove her?

[Guest Bobby]

She was told she could not vote 

[Guest Bobby]

she was told she could not vote. 

[Hieu H. Huynh]

1 hour ago, Guest Bobby said:

...At our last board meeting, a motion was made to remove the president from the board...

Do your bylaws allow this (see FAQ #20)?

[Guest Bobby]

The bylaws state that any member can be voted off for any reason with a 2/3 vote

[J. J.]

2 hours ago, Guest Bobby said:

She was told she could not vote 

Who told her that?  Did she attempt to vote?

[Guest Bobby]

10 minutes ago, J. J. said:

Who told her that?  Did she attempt to vote?

another board member told her just before the vote. She made no attempt to vote nor dispute that she couldn’t  

 

[J. J.]

27 minutes ago, Guest Bobby said:

another board member told her just before the vote. She made no attempt to vote nor dispute that she couldn’t  

 

If no one prevented her from voting (or prevented her vote, if cast, from being counted), then she was permitted to vote, but chose not to cast a vote.

 

If someone told her to jump in a lake, she would not have to jump in a lake. 

[Guest Bobby]

10 hours ago, J. J. said:

If no one prevented her from voting (or prevented her vote, if cast, from being counted), then she was permitted to vote, but chose not to cast a vote.

 

If someone told her to jump in a lake, she would not have to jump in a lake. 

I think we are missing the point and my true question. 8 sitting members. We only counted 7. Whether or not she voted it is still not a true 2/3 vote. 5 of 8 is not 2/3. She is now changing everything that was done for the week she was out. She refuses to meet to make sure no other bylaws are being broken. Some feel until the board votes to veto what happened that she is still technically not the president. Plus, she is assuming that because of the procedural error, that it’s back to business as usual with no revote in sight. What can we do. Everything just seems a mess right now and the board feels powerless against her. 

[Bruce Lages]

A 2/3 vote, according to RONR, is an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the members present and voting. You said originally that there were 5 votes for and 2 against. That satisfies RONR's definition of a 2/3 vote. What do your bylaws say about the vote requirement? Is there a statement to the effect of 'a vote of 2/3 of the membership of the board' or something similar?

As to what to do about it now:  the decision announced at the meeting would stand until it is ruled null and void at a meeting of the board. If the president was improperly denied the right to vote, that would constitute a 'continuing breach' that can be raised as a point of order at any time. The board will ultimately decide - if it agrees that her right to vote was improperly denied, then the action is null and void and she remains president. If not, the action taken at the meeting stands.

However, based on recent discussions on this forum, I believe that an error in declaring the results of the vote as satisfying or not satisfying a 2/3 requirement does not constitute a continuing breach, and it is therefore too late to raise a point of order about that issue (if it were, in fact, an issue).

[Guest Bobby]

11 hours ago, J. J. said:

If no one prevented her from voting (or prevented her vote, if cast, from being counted), then she was permitted to vote, but chose not to cast a vote.

 

If someone told her to jump in a lake, she would not have to jump in a lake. 

I think we are missing the point and my true question. 8 sitting members. We only counted 7. Whether or not she voted it is still not a true 2/3 vote. 5 of 8 is not 2/3. She is now changing everything that was done for the week she was out. She refuses to meet to make sure no other bylaws are being broken. Some feel until the board votes to veto what happened that she is still technically not the president. Plus, she is assuming that because of the procedural error, that it’s back to business as usual with no revote in sight. What can we do. Everything just seems a mess right now and the board feels powerless against her. Also, should the vote technically count because she did not call a timely point of order

[Guest Bobby]

37 minutes ago, Bruce Lages said:

A 2/3 vote, according to RONR, is an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the members present and voting. You said originally that there were 5 votes for and 2 against. That satisfies RONR's definition of a 2/3 vote. What do your bylaws say about the vote requirement? Is there a statement to the effect of 'a vote of 2/3 of the membership of the board' or something similar?

As to what to do about it now:  the decision announced at the meeting would stand until it is ruled null and void at a meeting of the board. If the president was improperly denied the right to vote, that would constitute a 'continuing breach' that can be raised as a point of order at any time. The board will ultimately decide - if it agrees that her right to vote was improperly denied, then the action is null and void and she remains president. If not, the action taken at the meeting stands.

However, based on recent discussions on this forum, I believe that an error in declaring the results of the vote as satisfying or not satisfying a 2/3 requirement does not constitute a continuing breach, and it is therefore too late to raise a point of order about that issue (if it were, in fact, an issue).

Thank you for the response. Am I to assume that until the board votes. That everything she does until that time would be null and void. Our next meeting is in Feb. she has taken the lawyers letter and refuses to let any board member question it. She is shutting down any board member who date question this letter and does not feel anything further needs to be done. 

[J. J.]

39 minutes ago, Guest Bobby said:

I think we are missing the point and my true question. 8 sitting members. We only counted 7. Whether or not she voted it is still not a true 2/3 vote. 5 of 8 is not 2/3. She is now changing everything that was done for the week she was out. She refuses to meet to make sure no other bylaws are being broken. Some feel until the board votes to veto what happened that she is still technically not the president. Plus, she is assuming that because of the procedural error, that it’s back to business as usual with no revote in sight. What can we do. Everything just seems a mess right now and the board feels powerless against her. Also, should the vote technically count because she did not call a timely point of order

Under RONR, a two-thirds vote means two thirds of the votes cast.  5 is more than 2/3 of 7.   Unless your bylaws specify a vote two-thirds of the entire membership of the board, this was a two-thirds vote (see p. 403). 

I will also agree with Bruce that, even if there were not two-thirds vote, it is too late to raise a point of order.

Since she was removed as president, the board should continue on, probably with a new president.

Edited January 19, 2018 at 05:28 PM by J. J.

[Weldon Merritt]

24 minutes ago, J. J. said:

...

I will also agree with Bruce that, even if there were not two-thirds vote, it is too late to raise a point of order.

...

I also agree, unless she was improperly denied the right to vote. And it's not clear to me that she was. Just being told that she couldn't vote did not, in itself, suffice. I think she would have had to have raised a point of order, or somehow attempted to vote, but it appears  that she just accepted being told that she could not vote.

In any event, the announced result stands until someone raises a point of order at a subsequent meeting, and the point is ruled on. Then an appeal mosty likely will ensue, and the assembly will decide.

[J. J.]

14 minutes ago, Weldon Merritt said:

I also agree, unless she was improperly denied the right to vote. And it's not clear to me that she was. Just being told that she couldn't vote did not, in itself, suffice. I think she would have had to have raised a point of order, or somehow attempted to vote, but it appears  that she just accepted being told that she could not vote.

In any event, the announced result stands until someone raises a point of order at a subsequent meeting, and the point is ruled on. Then an appeal mosty likely will ensue, and the assembly will decide.

I was treating that as a given, in this situation, based on Guest Bobby's statement, and assuming it is accurate:

 

13 hours ago, Guest Bobby said:

another board member told her just before the vote. She made no attempt to vote nor dispute that she couldn’t  

 

Had she attempted to vote and was denied, e.g. was deliberately not given a ballot, or not called in a roll call, my answer would be different.

Had her vote not been counted when cast, e.g. she gave a ballot that was crumpled and tossed in a waste basket, my answer would be different.

 

Edited January 19, 2018 at 06:20 PM by J. J.

[Guest Bobby]

thank you all for the feedback. 

[Josh Martin]

8 hours ago, Bruce Lages said:

As to what to do about it now:  the decision announced at the meeting would stand until it is ruled null and void at a meeting of the board. If the president was improperly denied the right to vote, that would constitute a 'continuing breach' that can be raised as a point of order at any time. The board will ultimately decide - if it agrees that her right to vote was improperly denied, then the action is null and void and she remains president. If not, the action taken at the meeting stands.

So far, it does not seem that her rights were denied. She just listened to bad advice.

7 hours ago, J. J. said:

Under RONR, a two-thirds vote means two thirds of the votes cast.  5 is more than 2/3 of 7.   Unless your bylaws specify a vote two-thirds of the entire membership of the board, this was a two-thirds vote (see p. 403). 

I will also agree with Bruce that, even if there were not two-thirds vote, it is too late to raise a point of order.

Since she was removed as president, the board should continue on, probably with a new president.

J. J., I agree with all of this as a parliamentary matter, but since it seems the former President has retained legal counsel, perhaps it would be prudent for the board to also consult an attorney. Perhaps there are legal issues involved.

[J. J.]

1 hour ago, Josh Martin said:

So far, it does not seem that her rights were denied. She just listened to bad advice.

J. J., I agree with all of this as a parliamentary matter, but since it seems the former President has retained legal counsel, perhaps it would be prudent for the board to also consult an attorney. Perhaps there are legal issues involved.

While is always a good idea to have a capable attorney, simply involving one does not make it a legal issue, as opposed to one of procedure. 

[Guest Bobby]

Our board is refusing to call a special meeting to make a motion to “Veto”. The president sent an email to membership that due to a procedural error the vote has been rendered null and void. Our next regular meeting is feb. 13. What can the membership do to force her to step down. She has gone rogue and no one on the board is challenging. 

[Gary Novosielski]

There is no motion to Veto in RONR.  The president can only make rulings  during  a meeting, when her rulings are subject to Appeal by any two members.  At the next regular meeting, raise a Point of Order that the president exceeded her power, and that the original motion should be in full force and effect.  Since the president will doubtless find that point not well taken, make sure you have read up on the motion to Appeal From the Decision of the Chair, (RONR §24) and are prepared to appeal the decision.

On the question of removal of officers, check your bylaws carefully, and see this FAQ.

Edited January 22, 2018 at 02:39 PM by Gary Novosielski

[Guest Bobby]

Can anyone raise the point of order or does it have to come from an elected board member. 

[Gary Novosielski]

At a board meeting, only members  of the board can raise a point of order.

At a general meeting, members of the general membership can raise a point of order.

[Guest Bobby]

thank you