Eight similar organizations/agencies operate under one roof.
To coordinate the facilities/finances they have a board of directors, one person from each entity to vote on issues of concern.
Every two years they elect a chairperson from the group of directors for continuity usually the vice chair. All works well.
My concern is that the newly elected chair also remains the director/representative for the specific organization he voted for prior to being elected.
The secretary, treasurer and facility managers (are paid honorariums) and attend meetings as non-voting positions as they report to the directors monthly.
Presently the chair votes representing the original organization and has a vote to break a tie as the chair.
To me this is odd. How can a chair remain impartial when he/she a possibility of two votes?
The by-laws after reviewing conflict for convenience in my view and are convoluted.
Would this be appropriate:
Once a director is elected to the chair, the specific organization he represented elects another person to represent them on the board as a voting member.
The chair remains neutral, impartial (non voting) representing all organizations and if there is a tie the secretary calls for the chair to cast a vote?
Have the by-laws reflect this in the specific areas.
President and Representing Director at the same time
in General Discussion
Posted
Eight similar organizations/agencies operate under one roof.
To coordinate the facilities/finances they have a board of directors, one person from each entity to vote on issues of concern.
Every two years they elect a chairperson from the group of directors for continuity usually the vice chair. All works well.
My concern is that the newly elected chair also remains the director/representative for the specific organization he voted for prior to being elected.
The secretary, treasurer and facility managers (are paid honorariums) and attend meetings as non-voting positions as they report to the directors monthly.
Presently the chair votes representing the original organization and has a vote to break a tie as the chair.
To me this is odd. How can a chair remain impartial when he/she a possibility of two votes?
The by-laws after reviewing conflict for convenience in my view and are convoluted.
Would this be appropriate:
Once a director is elected to the chair, the specific organization he represented elects another person to represent them on the board as a voting member.
The chair remains neutral, impartial (non voting) representing all organizations and if there is a tie the secretary calls for the chair to cast a vote?
Have the by-laws reflect this in the specific areas.