Guest Paul Posted July 9, 2010 at 01:14 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2010 at 01:14 PM We have a potential conflict coming up on a committee I belong to. Long and short, it's a topic that the chair does not wish to discuss because the odds are that any vote the committee takes will not be in accordance with what he wants. Chances of him voluntarily scheduling a meeting are slim.In the event that a chair refuses to schedule a meeting to discuss a topic, what recourse does the rest of the committee have? Can we go ahead and schedule one on our own, hold discussion, make motions, etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted July 9, 2010 at 01:19 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2010 at 01:19 PM Unless this is the initial meeting of this committee, your only recourse is to notify whomever appointed this person to the committee. They can remove him from the committee and/or from the chairmanship assuming they made him chairman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted July 9, 2010 at 01:49 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2010 at 01:49 PM The body that appointed/created the committee can instruct it to meet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted July 9, 2010 at 01:54 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2010 at 01:54 PM The body that appointed/created the committee can instruct it to meet.I knew I left something off of my response. J.J. always has my back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted July 9, 2010 at 02:21 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2010 at 02:21 PM The body that appointed/created the committee can instruct it to meet.And might consider appointing a more impartial chair, while their at it. My .02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weldon Merritt Posted July 9, 2010 at 02:30 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2010 at 02:30 PM Unless this is the initial meeting of this committee, your only recourse is to notify whomever appointed this person to the committee.How about RONR p. 482, ll. 19-21: “If its chairman fails to call a meeting, the committee must meet on the call of any two of its members . . .”? Or does that apply only to the initial meeting? I had always assumed that language applies to any committee meeting, but since it follows a sentence clearly referring to the initial committee meeting, maybe I have been misreading it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted July 9, 2010 at 03:11 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2010 at 03:11 PM How about RONR p. 482, ll. 19-21: “If its chairman fails to call a meeting, the committee must meet on the call of any two of its members . . .”? Or does that apply only to the initial meeting? I had always assumed that language applies to any committee meeting, but since it follows a sentence clearly referring to the initial committee meeting, maybe I have been misreading it.I think Mr. Merritt's assumption is strengthened by the fact that RONR refers to "a" meeting and not "the" (first) meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted July 9, 2010 at 03:26 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2010 at 03:26 PM How about RONR p. 482, ll. 19-21: “If its chairman fails to call a meeting, the committee must meet on the call of any two of its members . . .”? Or does that apply only to the initial meeting? I had always assumed that language applies to any committee meeting, but since it follows a sentence clearly referring to the initial committee meeting, maybe I have been misreading it.My view of it has always been it's the intial meeting, whether that's the first meeting ever, or the first meeting when the committee members have changed, but not afterward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted July 9, 2010 at 03:38 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2010 at 03:38 PM How about RONR p. 482, ll. 19-21: “If its chairman fails to call a meeting, the committee must meet on the call of any two of its members . . .”? Or does that apply only to the initial meeting? I had always assumed that language applies to any committee meeting, but since it follows a sentence clearly referring to the initial committee meeting, maybe I have been misreading it.I think Mr. Merritt's assumption is strengthened by the fact that RONR refers to "a" meeting and not "the" (first) meeting.My view of it has always been it's the intial meeting, whether that's the first meeting ever, or the first meeting when the committee members have changed, but not afterward."... but meetings of the committee are called as state on page 482." (p. 473 ll.4-5) The plural form here would seem to support the idea of the calling of any meeting, not just the initial meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Goldsworthy Posted July 9, 2010 at 06:36 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2010 at 06:36 PM In the event that a chair refuses to schedule a meeting to discuss a topic, what recourse does the rest of the committee have?Just to cover the subtle side point.Committee meetings, in general, are just called.Committee meetings are not called specifically for any given topic.So, if a committee meeting is called, all topics with fall under control of the committee are fair game.In other words, if the chairman of a committee were to "Call a meeting for the Johnson resolution," that does not imply that the committee members cannot bring up other business appropriate for that committee.The chairman of a committee does not control the agenda. The chairman of a committee cannot gag the majority will of a committee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Paul Posted July 9, 2010 at 07:39 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2010 at 07:39 PM Thanks, everybody.Here's my situation:The chair wants to push something to the board that the rest of the committee probably doesn't support. It has not been brought up as an agenda item to our committee, probably on purpose as the committee isn't likely to support the chair's position. He plans on making his proposal to the board at the end of this month at the board meeting.A) The board is highly unlikely to order the committee to hold a meeting and address the issue before the end of the month. The committee chair is highly unlikely to call a meeting on his own. He's not going to get committee support, so rather than have a motion passed opposing his own wishes, he's just going to avoid having the committee address it at all.So - if the board isn't going to help, and the chair isn't going to cooperate, I want to schedule a meeting anyway. Even if the chair refuses to attend, I'd want to hold the meeting in his absence and address the topic at hand. I don't think getting support from the majority of the remaining committee members to hold such a meeting will be an issue.Of course, there's nothing stopping me from getting everybody else together, talking about it, and coming to an agreement. That's easy enough. The question is whether that could be considered an 'official' committee meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted July 9, 2010 at 08:21 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2010 at 08:21 PM The chair wants to push something to the board that the rest of the committee probably doesn't support. It has not been brought up as an agenda item to our committee, probably on purpose as the committee isn't likely to support the chair's position. He plans on making his proposal to the board at the end of this month at the board meeting.Disclaimer: I'm still working my through the section on committees.That said, I'd guess this committee exists to consider certain matters, and report back to the Board. The matters to be taken up, and reported back, should reflect the recommendation of the committee, based on adequate consideration and perhaps even a bit of voting! What the heck! So, I'd think that if the Chair wants to do one thing, and the rest of the committee doesn't want to do that thing, well.... that thing will not be "pushed to the board". In the committee report, I suppose it might include reference to the consideration of that thing, with the "majority opinion" being not to do it.Of course, if the committee chair wants to pursue it on his own, and make a motion at the Board meeting, I'm not sure what might prevent him. But he wouldn't likely be doing it with the backing and support of the committee. Now, if he does "push" this at the Board meeting, and the Board receives it with welcome and open arms, despite that this ostensible "committee recommendation" is nothing of the sort, and if the Board even takes it under advisement or perhaps votes and adopts it, then you have much bigger problems than a mavricky chair goin' rogue. But you know that already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 10, 2010 at 09:55 PM Report Share Posted July 10, 2010 at 09:55 PM Of course, there's nothing stopping me from getting everybody else together, talking about it, and coming to an agreement. That's easy enough. The question is whether that could be considered an 'official' committee meeting.In my opinion, under the citation already mentioned, any two members may call a meeting of the committee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted July 10, 2010 at 11:20 PM Report Share Posted July 10, 2010 at 11:20 PM "... but meetings of the committee are called as state on page 482." (p. 473 ll.4-5) The plural form here would seem to support the idea of the calling of any meeting, not just the initial meeting.That does it for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nancy N. Posted July 11, 2010 at 04:30 AM Report Share Posted July 11, 2010 at 04:30 AM That does it for me. Yes indeed. Nicely done, David.-- Nancy N. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.