Executive Board Meeting

[Guest Jim T]

Are topics discussed at an Executive Board Meeting confidential or must it be shared at the next regular membership meeting?

[Chris Harrison]

Are topics discussed at an Executive Board Meeting confidential or must it be shared at the next regular membership meeting?

As far as RONR is concerned unless the body goes into Executive Session any member could give a reporter from the Washington Post (or pick your paper) a blow-by-blow accounting of everything that was said and done at the meeting. Of course the Board may customarily meet in Executive Session (where members under the pain of disciplinary actions cannot divulge anything that happened at the meeting to nonmembers) or their rules may impose a form of confidentiality. The Board however may be required to give reports to the Membership at their meetings but that usually only involves what the Board has been doing and not what their members have been saying.

[Gary c Tesser]

I still don't understand how p. 510 - 511 applies, or doesn't.

[Gary c Tesser]

I still don't understand how p. 510 - 511 applies, or doesn't.

Anyone, please?

[Shmuel Gerber]

I still don't understand how p. 510 - 511 applies, or doesn't.

Anyone, please?

Do you mean how it applies in general, or how it applies to Mr. T's question? I don't see how it applies to Mr. T's question at all.

[Gary c Tesser]

Do you mean how it applies in general, or how it applies to Mr. T's question? I don't see how it applies to Mr. T's question at all.

Thank you for looking at this.

ISTM that it applies if my marginal note on p. 510 is correct, which says that on 26 June 2011, it was said authoritatively [source on request] that the rule on p. 510, end of line 35 - p. 511, line 2 applies to boards too. (ISTM that all of p. 510, line 32 - p. 511, line 3, does not really apply only to minority reports, and should be moved to a more general heading in a future edition. But maybe I am missing the point there too.) Either way, that sentence has long bothered me subliminally, because I take it to mean that boards and committees function under a super-executive session condition, which is an eye-opener and, if true, should not be buried back there on the bottom of p. 510. I'd prefer to be informed that I completely misunderstand it, and incidentally to be told what it really means.

(I just spent about an hour looking for that ~ 20 June 2011 forum discussion thread, to review it, but no luck. Anyone who knows where it is, please drop us a line.)

(Edited to add parenthetical note.)

[Dan Honemann]

Thank you for looking at this.

ISTM that it applies if my marginal note on p. 510 is correct, which says that on 26 June 2011, it was said authoritatively [source on request] that the rule on p. 510, end of line 35 - p. 511, line 2 applies to boards too. (ISTM that all of p. 510, line 32 - p. 511, line 3, does not really apply only to minority reports, and should be moved to a more general heading in a future edition. But maybe I am missing the point there too.) Either way, that sentence has long bothered me subliminally, because I take it to mean that boards and committees function under a super-executive session condition, which is an eye-opener and, if true, should not be buried back there on the bottom of p. 510. I'd prefer to be informed that I completely misunderstand it, and incidentally to be told what it really means.

(I just spent about an hour looking for that ~ 20 June 2011 forum discussion thread, to review it, but no luck. Anyone who knows where it is, please drop us a line.)

(Edited to add parenthetical note.)

It appears to me that you do misunderstand what that sentence means, but I will leave it to Shmuel to explain.

[Shmuel Gerber]

It appears to me that you do misunderstand what that sentence means, but I will leave it to Shmuel to explain.

I don't know, maybe it just means exactly what it says. :-)

It is referring to "debate on any written or oral report in the assembly", so anything that occurred in deliberations of the committee is simply not relevant unless the committee has chosen to report it.

In any event, I don't see how a rule regarding debate on a report would be applicable to a situation in which a board is apparently not reporting.

[David A Foulkes]

Thank you for looking at this.

ISTM that it applies if my marginal note on p. 510 is correct, which says that on 26 June 2011, it was said authoritatively [source on request] that the rule on p. 510, end of line 35 - p. 511, line 2 applies to boards too. (ISTM that all of p. 510, line 32 - p. 511, line 3, does not really apply only to minority reports, and should be moved to a more general heading in a future edition. But maybe I am missing the point there too.) Either way, that sentence has long bothered me subliminally, because I take it to mean that boards and committees function under a super-executive session condition, which is an eye-opener and, if true, should not be buried back there on the bottom of p. 510. I'd prefer to be informed that I completely misunderstand it, and incidentally to be told what it really means.

(I just spent about an hour looking for that ~ 20 June 2011 forum discussion thread, to review it, but no luck. Anyone who knows where it is, please drop us a line.)

(Edited to add parenthetical note.)

The post (and thread) you're looking for is here. It was June 26, as you noted first, so I don't know where June 20 came from, but oh well.

[Dan Honemann]

In any event, I don't see how a rule regarding debate on a report would be applicable to a situation in which a board is apparently not reporting.

It wouldn't, just as it wouldn't be applicable to a situation in which a committee is not reporting. That's not the point either.