rockbust

On 3/22/2024 at 6:30 PM, J. J. said:

The subject of the letter, the accused, was not in the executive session.  I question how anyone can claim that the accused could violate an executive session of which he did not attend, and, apparently, had no right to attend. 

That said, it would be possible to bring an additional charge against the accused, though not for violating executive session in this regard. 

I understand this. So to that end anything that comes out of exectutive session by way of resolution, action that is sent to any one person can be shared by that party to anyone since they were not a participant in that session?  

On 3/20/2024 at 3:29 PM, Gary Novosielski said:

I don't necessarily agree that that language applies to the accused.  And RONR does not say "including the accused"; that is your assumption, and I think if it were true, it would probably have said so.  I assert that those paragraphs on secrecy can be read as not applying to the accused, without encountering any contradiction.  The secrecy is described as protecting the accused from defamation, and the society from being found liable for it.  The accused cannot be guilty of defaming himself, however.

In particular, I wonder how the society would be able to enforce such a requirement, especially after imposing expulsion as a penalty.  I think there is something wrong with telling someone, "We're secretly accusing you of aggravated mopery with intent to gawk, and you can't tell anyone, including your lawyer."

<see what I did there?>

Thank you so much for all the response. 

One could argue that by saying "members" they mean members else they would have excluded the accused?

On 3/20/2024 at 3:14 PM, J. J. said:

The answer is still the same.  The assembly must be in session to have an executive session.  The committee can meet in executive session as well. 

Go back and re-read my answers. 

And are you saying the resolution that came out of executive session along with a copy of the complaint are not confidential? It seems Robert's rules says otherwise

Rights of the Society and the Accused
63:2 A society has the right to investigate the character of its
members and officers as may be necessary to the enforcement
of its own standards. But neither the society nor any member
has the right to make public any information obtained through
such investigation; if it becomes common knowledge within the
society, it may not be revealed to any persons outside the
society. Consequently, a trial must always be held in executive
session, as must the introduction and consideration of all
resolutions leading up to the trial.
63:3 If (after trial) a member is expelled or an officer is removed
from office, the society has the right to disclose that fact—
circulating it only to the extent required for the protection of the
society or, possibly, of other organizations. Neither the society
nor any of its members has the right to make public the charge
of which an officer or member has been found guilty, or to
reveal any other details connected with the case. To make any
of the facts public may constitute libel. A trial by the society
cannot legally establish the guilt of the accused, as understood
in a court of law; it can only establish his guilt as affecting the
society’s judgment of his fitness for membership or office.

I have highlighted a few phrases from Robert's rules that is leading me to believe all information pertinent to the case is confidential and secret even outside of the actual executive session meeting or meetings.

1. The society can investigate by way of committee and all is confidential. The investigation is held outside of executive session yet Robert's rules says it is confidential. And not to be shared. So certainly they are saying things outside of executive session are confidential.

2. Not only is the trial confidential and considered executive session but also introductions considerations and resolutions leading up to the trial. As an important note our bylaws allow for the board or a committee of the board to act as an investigative committee and to decide if we are going to pursue charges by way of resolutions. These resolutions along with the actual complaint are required to be sent to the defendant and our bylaws. It is my belief that Robert's rules consider these confidential as they state in the second highlighted section. 

3. Robert's rules states that even after the trial no member including the accused can disclose the charges that were filed upon him. Why would it not be allowed after the trial but be allowed before the trial. This seems to be very conflicting.

It is my understanding that all matters involving the disipline are exectutive session even if not held in that session. the charges, the investigation and the trial even including after the trial where the accused can not say what charges were brought against him or her. It seem illogical for someone to file charges on another that may contain extreemly sensitive matters only to have it spread through the membership by the accused. 

I also found this discussion just now. https://robertsrules.forumflash.com/topic/35255-confidentiality-of-chargesdisciplinary-action/   Are we saying before trial is acceptable to say what they are being disciplined for but after trial they can not?  Why would the investigation have to take place in secret but then charges not? why can the accused share this information but others can not? 

On 3/18/2024 at 9:12 PM, J. J. said:

IMO, it does not violate executive session, because this letter was sent outside of the meeting.

If this is some violation, separate charges would have to be filed for that. 

Hmm. It seems there would be some duty of secrecy with the complaint letter?  Would that extend to the board also. Is everyone free to discuss these charges and share this letter with anyone outside of what is "discussed" in ex session?   It seems that since the letter is forwarded ONLY to the member of the alleged misconduct and it has arrisen out of exectuve session they would be duty bound to maintain its secrecy?

Our bylaws procedure is this. member files complaint to secretary. Board meets in ex session and decides if any actions alleged in the complaint would, if proven, constitute conduct, which is prejudicial to the best interests of the Club. If yes, Secretary forwards complaint and informs them they have 30 days to request a hearing. Hearing is also held in ex session. 

On 3/18/2024 at 8:53 PM, Rob Elsman said:

Do the organization's bylaws specifically authorize the executive board to handle "complaints" and "charges"?

Yes the bylaws do authorize the board. 

On 10/13/2023 at 6:56 AM, Josh Martin said:

Were the customs in this guide ever adopted by the assembly?

The assumption inherent in 2:25 is that customs are unwritten. Conceivably, however, I suppose an organization could, as yours has done, compile a list of certain customs of the organization. Writing a custom down, in and of itself, does not make something a rule.

The key is whether these customs were adopted by the assembly. If so, they are now standing rules. If not, they are customs, and the rules pertaining to customs are applicable.

I would note that writing a "procedure guide" which contains both customs and standing rules is highly likely to lead to confusion in this matter. I would strongly advise that 1) all of the customs be placed in a separate section and 2) a notation is added indicating that these are not rules adopted by the assembly, but are instead simply a description of the society's customs.

In the alternative, perhaps it would be desirable to formally adopt some or all of these customs as rules.

I would also note that RONR does not really say a custom can be "changed" by a majority vote. Rather, what it says is as follows:

"In some organizations, a particular practice may sometimes come to be followed as a matter of established custom so that it is treated practically as if it were prescribed by a rule. If there is no contrary provision in the parliamentary authority or written rules of the organization, such an established custom is adhered to unless the assembly, by a majority vote, agrees in a particular instance to do otherwise." RONR (12th ed.) 2:25, emphasis added

A custom isn't a rule. And therefore the procedures for "changing" customs are not as formalized as the procedures for changing rules. (Keep in mind again, that customs are generally unwritten - your society is an outlier in this regard.) Choosing to deviate from a custom in a particular case does not necessarily indicate that the assembly wishes to permanently change the custom. There really isn't any way for an assembly to vote to permanently change a custom, except by adopting a rule which will supersede the custom. I suppose the other way would be for the society to repeatedly choose to deviate from the custom and, over time, establish a new custom. (Doing something once isn't much of a custom.)

I would also clarify that standing rules do not necessarily require a 2/3 vote for their amendment. Amending a standing rule requires a 2/3 vote, a vote of a majority of the entire membership, or a majority vote with previous notice.

Thank you for the detailed reply. 

Our society wrote a procedure guide that contained both customs and standing rules. The standing rules are motions adopted by our society and the other information is the way things are mostly done. 

Does it take a 2/3 vote to amend both customs and standing rules.  2:25 mentions customs and written rules. would a custom that is written down as in our procedure guide become a "rule" and require a 2/3 vote to amend as if it is a standing rule or is it a custom that can be changed by a majority vote?

On 9/24/2023 at 9:23 PM, Joshua Katz said:

They should be the subject of a point of order, not a motion to rescind. If you move to rescind, what if the motion fails? Instead, raise a point of order that they're improper and null and void.

Thank you

Thank you all very much. I am part of a completly new board of directors and we are going though standing rules and policy and discovered these items. 

As a follow up question do they need to be rescinded by the new board? 

Our organization has individual membership and chapter club membership. Our bylaws state Section 2. Voting. At the Annual Meeting or a special meeting of the Club, voting shall be limited to those members in good standing who are present at the meeting and Chapter Club delegates so instructed by their Club, except for the election of Officers, Directors, amendments to the Constitution and By-Laws which shall be decided by written ballot cast by mail.   nothing else in the bylaws

Last year the membership voted to restrict voting from within each Chapter Clubs to only members who are dual members for vote brought forward by the chapter club delegates.  so if you are not a dual member you can not vote on elections and more of the parent org. Does robert's rules say anthing about this situation. it also seems impractical as many chapter clubs have maybe 2 or so dual members.

Thank you in advance

Robert

The bylaws make no mention of any powers at this meeting except to set time and date.

Can a Board impose special rules of order on a membership meeting?

example #1 at a annual membership meeting the membership adopted a motion to have an event rotate to a specific geographic area yearly. The following month the board adopted a special rule of order saying it can be rescinded or amended by majority vote at any membership meeting.

Example #2 The board adopted a motion that says any motion adopted at a membership meeting will become effective 90 days after minutes of meeting is published to membership.

Thank you

Robert

Based on what reference from Roberts rules.   Thank you

Hi, I have a few questions if anyone can share their expertise on.

our bylaws state:
Committees
Section 1. The Board may appoint committees or persons to advance the work of the Club in
matters such as dog shows, companion events, trophies, annual awards, membership and other
fields which may well be served by committees. Such persons or committees, except the
Nominating Committee and the Chapter Clubs Advisory Council, shall always be subject to the
final authority of the Board.
Section 2. Any committee except the Nominating Committee, the Ballot-counting Committee
and the Chapter Clubs Advisory Council may be terminated by a majority vote of the full
membership of the Board upon written notice to the chairman of the committee being terminated.
The appointment of any member to a committee or of any person to advance the work of the
Club may be terminated by a majority vote of the full membership of the Board upon written
notice to the individual concerned and to the chairman, if any, of the committee affected. The
Board may appoint successors to those persons whose appointments have been terminated, or
may reconstitute a committee that has been terminated. 

Situation 1: At the general membership meeting a motion is approved directing the board to create a committee for the purpose of creating a specific award and award criteria. 

Situation 2: the board creates a committee.

situation 3: the committee creates a award and criteria and presents report at the general membership meeting. award proposal is approved.

Question 1:  While I understand the Society interprets its own bylaws, does this appear to give the board exclusive powers for committee creation, termination and appointments?

Question 2: Did the membership have the authority to direct the Board to create a specific committee?

Question 3: Can the Board terminate the committee created by the society membership?

Question 4: Can the award and or its criteria be amended by the Board or does the society membership now need to amend or rescind the award?

Thank you