Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

MaraBrooks

Members
  • Posts

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

MaraBrooks's Achievements

  1. So if the town's position, hypothetically, is they don't have an obligation to follow Robert's Rules (beyond the small board cheat sheet they posted on their website) and they don't have any existing policies and procedures about what to do in a given situation, then it's ethical for the chair to just kind of decide what should happen, and to perhaps choose a successor that is not the vice chair? It does seem to me that the town looks to Robert's Rules (Selectboard adopted RR for Small boards officially, and state requires annual meetings to abide by Robert's Rules.)
  2. Here's what happened: The chair came to a recent select board meeting and said he intended to announce his plan to resign as chair in executive session, but the town attorney advised him that he had no grounds to do that. So it was done in an open session. The resigning chair said he wanted to make a two part motion to both resign as chair (but stay on the board) and elect a member he had already chosen to be the new chair. (The "new chair" was not the sitting vice chair.) The resigning chair indicated he had been "working with" the proposed new chair for six months and felt "confident" he would do a great job, so he wanted to have a hand in steering the board forward as he announced his resignation. There was some indication that the other board members, except for the Vice Chair, had been tipped off to the chair's impending resignation. The vice chair only learned of it at the meeting. The chair admitted later that the "new chair" was told about the chair's intention to resign soon after he made the decision, even though the chair didn't inform anyone else on the board (supposedly.) The vice chair objected to the two part motion and to the chair's efforts to choose his own successor, rather than resigning in one motion and then letting the board decide as a group on electing a new chair. The two part motions were passed despite the vice chair's objections, with only the vice chair voting against them. The resigning chair initially refused to answer press inquiries about when he told each of the other members he was planning to resign, and the other members refused to disclose that information on the record. (Except for the vice chair, who openly said he found out about the resignation for the first time at the meeting.) At the most recent SB meeting, the resigning chair said the town attorney advised the board to "ratify" the two part motion by making another two, separate motions (i.e., to resign, and to elect the new vice chair.) Again the motions were passed, and again the vice chair voted against. Just seems to me there was some effort made to bypass what is standard practice of having the vice chair take over as chair. In other meetings when the chair was not present, the vice chair would step in as chair. Robert's Rules indicate the vice chair should become the chair. It seems like the resigning chair just made a decision to pick his new successor without any guidance (he seemed to state that he did not seek the town attorney's input or guidance on the issue until after his two part motion aroused concern among the public.) One thing that might figure into this -- there was a recent scandal involving a member of another board, and the resigning chair had made some public comments in the press about the person involved in the scandal that the vice chair publicly disagreed with. I don't get the feeling they like each other a whole lot. I contacted the town attorney to inquire as to what guidance the town uses in cases where the policies and procedures do not address a situation, and he refused to answer any questions. He said he has not been given the authority to speak to the press about anything involving the town or its general policies and procedures. I guess they keep him on a tight leash. And that's where it stands right now. The new chair has been appointed, the former chair remains on the board as a member, and the vice chair remains the vice chair.
  3. If a select board chair resigns as chair mid session but remains on the board as a regular member, does the vice chair automatically become the chair? Or can the resigning chair make a motion to appoint another member as chair at the same time he makes the motion to resign? This happened in a town I cover as a news reporter - the resigning chair made a double motion to resign and to appoint another member (not the vice chair) as his successor. He also disclosed that he had been preparing the member to take over as chair before he even informed the rest of the board he was leaving. This sounded pretty fishy to me, but the chair said the town attorney said it was "kosher" because there was "no guidance" in the board rules of procedure for what to do when a chair resigns mid session. The other board members, except for the vice president, voted to appoint the leaving chair's choice for new chair. The vice president voted against, and said he objected to the chair appointing his own successor in a double motion. The town has a Robert Rules cheat sheet for small boards posted to its official website, so I'm wondering about the resigning chair's claim that there was "no guidance" available (as it would seem the town refers to Robert's Rules in at least some instances.) Oh, and the town has no bylaws. I'd really appreciate any insight the experts here could offer.
×
×
  • Create New...