Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Tomm

Members
  • Content Count

    297
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That the entire board must decide who or how many members can make such a decision. And I assume by the virtue of a meeting with all the board members? The president can't simply make those types of decisions, he/she can only call for a committee with a certain number of members but that call must be in the form of a motion and the entire board gets to vote and decide? Do I have that about right?
  2. Where might I find such requirements as stated in RONR? Please!
  3. Does RONR address what's required when a board only allows certain board members to take part in a decision? A recent incident (retirement) required the board to interview and hire a new general manager. The board only allowed certain board members, (those with so called "more experience") to participate in the interview and hiring process. Question: Can that just be arbitrarily decided by the board president or does there need to be some sort of ad-hoc committee formally established where the entire board made the decision of who, and how many board members will participate?
  4. Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. Those who have known freedom, and then lost it, have never known it again. -Ronald Reagan
  5. 1:5 says, "the actions of any deliberative body are also subject to applicable procedural rules prescribed by local, state, or national law and would be null and void if in violation of such law." 2:18 says, "When a society or an assembly has adopted a particular parliamentary manual - such as this book- as its authority, the rules contained in that manual are binding upon it in all cases where they are not inconsistent with the bylaws (or constitution) of the the body, any of its special rules of order, or any provision of local, state, or national law applying to the particular type of
  6. Roger that but I suspect the member has no interest or wants to gain his seat back on the board and I don't blame him!
  7. And that will never happened because it was a unanimous vote!
  8. How is that even possible when the member has already been kicked off the board and will not be attending anymore meetings?
  9. I know for a fact that the notice was sent out with no subject material attached and no indication of why the meeting was being called. It was simply a notice that an executive session was to be held the following day.
  10. I think the board will be using the excuse that some board members were leaving for vacation, thereby allowing them to bypass the 72 hour notice, however, the next scheduled board meeting is two months away, so it's not like they could have postponed that executive session until members were back in town! This was nothing more than the railroading of a board member who doesn't think the same way as you! I'm sure you guys have seen this many, many times?
  11. Here's all I know...I attended the regularly scheduled open board meeting on Thursday. I am not a member of the board. The board takes a two month hiatus and doesn't meet in July or August so this was the last meeting for a while. During the debate process on a motion the Board member in question was the only member vehemently against the motion. A pissing contest prevailed to the point where the chair declared the member had a conflict of interest. (Note: every member of the board lives in the very community they are elected to make decisions about, so I think every one could be accused
  12. It just appears to be so out of line that the general membership is offered a whole list of requirements to be suspended but a board member can be terminated without even being able to defend themselves! Not to mention again, the board member violated none of the reasons stated in the article. I was hoping you guys would at least offer some reason I could go challenge the boards decision to terminate another board member who didn't even receive proper notification that he was being disciplined! I still believe reasons for termination and procedures to terminate are two separate iss
  13. Well, first of all none of those reasons even apply. The member didn't miss a meeting and didn't refuse or was incapable to perform his duties. This was strictly done because he had a different opinion on an issue than the rest of the board, but that's not my concern. My concern is "yes" they can terminate a board member, but in my mind it's a separate issue on how that process must be done. Surely the member has the right to defend himself and there needs to be a process that allows that to happen?
  14. This is what's stated in the Articles of Incorporation. The bylaws only talk about a conflict of interest and how it should be handled and reported but with no provisions for any type of termination: Article IX Removal of any elected or appointed Director may be done in either of the following ways: A. By a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the Board of Directors after a member of the Board is absent from three (3) or more consecutive regular meetings of the Board or who, in the opinion of such two-thirds (2/3) of the Board members, is unwilling or incapable of performi
  15. I'm ticked off because a member of the board was terminated for unjust reasons. In fact the member didn't receive the notification of the meeting until it was over. The bylaws provide a whole series of requirements to suspend a general member very similar to those listed in RONR, 14 day prior notification of meeting, board hearing procedures, board hearing decision, board hearing appeal process. There is no such list of requirements/procedures listed under a separate article in the bylaws for, and titled Board of Directors. The bylaws do state the reasons a board member can be t
×
×
  • Create New...