Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

JohnGalt

Members
  • Content Count

    2
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I am a member of a national club and have been nominated for office. The club has a history over the past few years of going in executive session more than once at nearly every monthly meeting. What is troubling to many of the members is that there is no disclosure as to the reason they go in exec session, and many members complain that if a decision is announced afterward it provides no reason for the decision. I have explained that that IS the parliamentary process, but they seem to want to know the "dirty details". At the same time, if any charges are filed and sustained in executive session, the identity of the member who is being removed or suspended is not revealed. None of these matters are handled in CBL for the organization, and the frequency of exec sessions as well as their length is raising many questions related to trust. This practice is contrary to my experience with executive sessions on a school board, for example, where a blanket reason is always given like the review or dismissal of an employee, student, bargaining agreement, or legal action). In the latter scenario, if an employee is to be terminated his name will likely be made at the next board meeting with the remarks that the board will not be renewing his contract.
  2. It appears that my organization has had some past issues with executive sessions. Please correct me if I am incorrect with my understanding on their use and application: 1. Prior to going into executive session, a motion to go into executive session must pass by majority with a specific reason included. For example, "I move that we go in executive session to discuss the employment, dismissal, or lawsuit regarding a specific member or employee." 2. Once executive session ends, and there is return to open session, the board MAY chose to vote on a decision as a result of this discussion. That vote will still not include the identity of party on whom the vote was taken. 3. Executive session discussion is to remain private only to those attending and may not be recorded or distributed. It appears that executive session may have been abused over a period of many years. Does that abuse of power constitute revised acceptable use based on past practice?
×
×
  • Create New...