Guest CTC-pa Posted April 26, 2011 at 05:25 PM Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 at 05:25 PM We are a non profit organization. In one of our previous board meetings, the recording secretary noted on the agenda that she is running for public office. I do not feel this was appropriate - Our organization is located in the State of Pa. What if anything should be done about this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted April 26, 2011 at 05:28 PM Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 at 05:28 PM What if anything should be done about this?If you think it warrants disciplinary action, see FAQ #20 and Ch. XX of RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted April 26, 2011 at 08:36 PM Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 at 08:36 PM I do not feel this was appropriateThen don't vote for her. And encourage others not to vote for her. If she's not elected you have no problem. Except maybe explaining to her why you didn't think she couldn't honorably serve in two offices at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted April 26, 2011 at 10:34 PM Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 at 10:34 PM We are a non profit organization. In one of our previous board meetings, the recording secretary noted on the agenda that she is running for public office. I do not feel this was appropriate Why not? Was she seeking the endorsement of the organization? If so, then placing the question on the agenda might make a lot of sense. When the agenda was up for approval, you could have moved to strike that item. Majority vote to amend the agenda, prior to adoption. Or simply wait until it came up and then speak and vote against it.Our organization is located in the State of Pa. What if anything should be done about this?You should probably move to New Jersey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted April 26, 2011 at 10:46 PM Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 at 10:46 PM You should probably move to New Jersey.Misery loves company? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:12 AM Report Share Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:12 AM You should probably move to New Jersey.I thought you had enough people there, already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Goldsworthy Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:57 AM Report Share Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:57 AM In one of our previous board meetings, the recording secretary noted on the agenda that she is running for public office. I do not feel this was appropriate.What if anything should be done about this?What do you mean by the pronoun "this"?(A.) That the secretary is running for public office?(B.) That secretaries, in general, ought not run for office?(C.) That officers of nonprofit corporations, in general, ought not run for office?(D.) That the secretary put some non-business (i.e., a personal announcement, and not of the organization, which is not a motion) into the agenda?(E.) That announcements of who-is-running-for-public-office has no business being on an agenda?(F.) That your nonprofit/tax-exempt status is at risk because your secretary is running for public office?(G.) That anyone who wins (or who may win) a public office ought not simultaneously serve as a secretary of a nonprofit organization?(H.) That this particular announcement is an ego trip, a power grab, a slap in the face, and/or a callous disregard for the feelings of others?(I.) That you know this secretary well, and this secretary would make a bad, corrupt, and/or foolish public servant?For what it is worth, you got my support for D and E. Q. Do you have a question about parliamentary procedure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted April 27, 2011 at 01:34 AM Report Share Posted April 27, 2011 at 01:34 AM What do you mean by the pronoun "this"?You left off: J. I am located in Pennsylvania. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted April 27, 2011 at 05:33 PM Report Share Posted April 27, 2011 at 05:33 PM Then don't vote for her. And encourage others not to vote for her. If she's not elected you have no problem. Except maybe explaining to her why you didn't think she couldn't honorably serve in two offices at the same time.I don't believe that Mr. CTC-pa is suggesting that the Secretary "couldn't honorably serve in two offices at the same time." I believe he is questioning the propriety of placing on the agenda that the Secretary is running for public office. At the very least, I might question how such an announcement is germane to the business of the organization. Depending on the type of organization, there could also be legal issues involved.Why not? Was she seeking the endorsement of the organization? If so, then placing the question on the agenda might make a lot of sense.Well, depending on the type of non-profit organization, it may not be legal for the organization to endorse candidates. That could be part of the concern regarding the placement of the item on the agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted April 27, 2011 at 06:22 PM Report Share Posted April 27, 2011 at 06:22 PM Well, depending on the type of non-profit organization, it may not be legal for the organization to endorse candidates. That could be part of the concern regarding the placement of the item on the agenda.Depending, yes. And there are many types of non-profits. I believe political parties are one type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CTC-PA Posted April 28, 2011 at 04:26 PM Report Share Posted April 28, 2011 at 04:26 PM What do you mean by the pronoun "this"?(A.) That the secretary is running for public office?(B.) That secretaries, in general, ought not run for office?(C.) That officers of nonprofit corporations, in general, ought not run for office?(D.) That the secretary put some non-business (i.e., a personal announcement, and not of the organization, which is not a motion) into the agenda?(E.) That announcements of who-is-running-for-public-office has no business being on an agenda?(F.) That your nonprofit/tax-exempt status is at risk because your secretary is running for public office?(G.) That anyone who wins (or who may win) a public office ought not simultaneously serve as a secretary of a nonprofit organization?(H.) That this particular announcement is an ego trip, a power grab, a slap in the face, and/or a callous disregard for the feelings of others?(I.) That you know this secretary well, and this secretary would make a bad, corrupt, and/or foolish public servant?For what it is worth, you got my support for D and E. Q. Do you have a question about parliamentary procedure?Thanks for respondingI realize I need to clarify - we are a 501c non profit youth organization - I am concerned that this informationon our agenda and in our minutes could japerdize our 501C statusI have no problem with her running for political office - but she was requested the support of all board members on election day Should any action be taken since this private information (that I feel is harmful to our 501C status) was placed on the agenda and in the minutes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CTC-PA Posted April 28, 2011 at 04:32 PM Report Share Posted April 28, 2011 at 04:32 PM I don't believe that Mr. CTC-pa is suggesting that the Secretary "couldn't honorably serve in two offices at the same time." I believe he is questioning the propriety of placing on the agenda that the Secretary is running for public office. At the very least, I might question how such an announcement is germane to the business of the organization. Depending on the type of organization, there could also be legal issues involved.Well, depending on the type of non-profit organization, it may not be legal for the organization to endorse candidates. That could be part of the concern regarding the placement of the item on the agenda.You are correct - We are a 501C charitable organization - I believe the inclusion of this information on our agenda and in our minutes to create a problem for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted April 28, 2011 at 04:34 PM Report Share Posted April 28, 2011 at 04:34 PM I realize I need to clarify - we are a 501c non profit youth organization - I am concerned that this informationon our agenda and in our minutes could japerdize our 501C statusI have no problem with her running for political office - but she was requested the support of all board members on election day Should any action be taken since this private information (that I feel is harmful to our 501C status) was placed on the agenda and in the minutes?You are correct - We are a 501C charitable organization - I believe the inclusion of this information on our agenda and in our minutes to create a problem for us.Thank you for clarifying the nature of your concern. Since your concern is of a legal nature, you should consult with a lawyer regarding whether this could jeopardize your tax status and whether any action should be taken. I would be sure to inform your lawyer about the type of 501C organization (the number in parentheses after the "C"), since there are many different types and the rules on this subject vary significantly depending on the type.From a parliamentary perspective, I would advise removing the announcement from the minutes. Since it seems no action was taken on the announcement, it does not belong in the minutes. The minutes are a record of what was done, not what was said. There is no parliamentary reason to bother changing the agenda after the session is over (and personally, I'd be inclined to rule such a motion out of order, since the motion adopting the agenda has now been fully executed). Once again, however, check with a lawyer to settle this matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.