Guest Charles Brown Posted October 24, 2011 at 04:13 AM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 04:13 AM If the secretary calls for a meeting, the purpose of which is to remove the president from the board,does the secretary, by virtue of having called the meeting, automatically become the chair even thought the president will be attending the meeting as well or is it necessary to have a motion, a second and a vote to establish who will be the chair. If the latter is the case who is it that calls the meeting to order and oversess the motion and the vote ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 24, 2011 at 04:32 AM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 04:32 AM Gotta ask an initial question: do the bylaws authorize the secretary to "call a meeting" in the first place?Do they authorize anyone, or any body, to call what, in RONR's terms, would be a "special meeting"?We'll pick up from those answers. (Maybe tomorrow - I'm getting sleepy.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Charles Brown Posted October 24, 2011 at 06:09 AM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 06:09 AM Yes the By-laws specifically authorize the Secretary as well as the President to call a Special Meeting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GcT Posted October 24, 2011 at 08:29 AM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 08:29 AM ...We'll pick up from those answers. (Maybe tomorrow - I'm getting sleepy.)Well, then. And since you're presumably fresh and rested, can you go back to your sensible plan with the virgules and asterisks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Cisar Posted October 24, 2011 at 10:49 AM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 10:49 AM Has the President been formally charged? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted October 24, 2011 at 11:21 AM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 11:21 AM If the secretary calls for a meeting, the purpose of which is to remove the president from the board,does the secretary, by virtue of having called the meeting, automatically become the chair even thought the president will be attending the meeting as well or is it necessary to have a motion, a second and a vote to establish who will be the chair. If the latter is the case who is it that calls the meeting to order and oversess the motion and the vote ?See RONR (11th ed.), p. 451, ll. 29-35 & pp. 452-453.Whether or not this disciplinary action is being handled properly is a different question, for a different thread, perhaps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 24, 2011 at 11:48 AM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 11:48 AM No matter what the purpose of the special meeting, the president, if he/she is there, presides.If you want someone else to preside, remove him from the chair by suspending the rules pf order -- p. 652. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted October 24, 2011 at 12:27 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 12:27 PM No matter what the purpose of the special meeting, the president, if he/she is there, presides.If you want someone else to preside, remove him from the chair by suspending the rules pf order -- p. 652.The rules don't need suspension to get the president out of the chair during a motion to discipline or remove him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 24, 2011 at 12:35 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 12:35 PM The rules don't need suspension to get the president out of the chair during a motion to discipline or remove him.Where's that?I'm not challenging your statement; I just haven't got to the largely rewritten last two chapters of the book. Is it in there?'Course, to bounce the presiden out of the chair at the very start of the meeting, before any other motions are made, will require the 2/3 rule suspension. Whether the chair will go quietly, is another matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted October 24, 2011 at 12:59 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 12:59 PM Where's that?I'm not challenging your statement; I just haven't got to the largely rewritten last two chapters of the book. Is it in there?'Course, to bounce the presiden out of the chair at the very start of the meeting, before any other motions are made, will require the 2/3 rule suspension. Whether the chair will go quietly, is another matter.P. 451, ll. 29-35. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burke Balch Posted October 24, 2011 at 01:01 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 01:01 PM RONR (11th ed.) p. 652, ll. 7-11 & n.* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted October 24, 2011 at 01:10 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 01:10 PM A special meeting for the purpose of removing the president from office, as a practical matter, if there is quorum, won't leave much for the president to preside over after calling the meeting to order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Charles Brown Posted October 24, 2011 at 02:13 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 02:13 PM Yes the President has received a cc of the charges 10 days ago as required in the by-lawsand a special meeting has been called by the Secretary as provided in the by -laws. This meeting will follow a regularly scheduled meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 24, 2011 at 03:14 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 03:14 PM Ooops, now there is, in what you say, another problem, which, if the president is antagonistic and crafty (and well versed in RONR), he/she could call you on and gum up the works.It isn't proper to call a special meeting for a time AFTER a regularly scheduled meeting, per RONR, p. 92 (11th Ed.) Although I suppose you might argue (also p. 92) that this is a special meeting called "to dedicate an entire session..." -- the "dedicate an entire session" rule is new to RONR/11. Whether "dedicate..." means you can call a special meeting after a regular meeting is not immediately apparent. Authorship team?Also, your bylaws may supersede the "not after" rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted October 24, 2011 at 03:38 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 03:38 PM Ooops, now there is, in what you say, another problem, which, if the president is antagonistic and crafty (and well versed in RONR), he/she could call you on and gum up the works.It isn't proper to call a special meeting for a time AFTER a regularly scheduled meeting, per RONR, p. 92 (11th Ed.) Although I suppose you might argue (also p. 92) that this is a special meeting called "to dedicate an entire session..." -- the "dedicate an entire session" rule is new to RONR/11. Whether "dedicate..." means you can call a special meeting after a regular meeting is not immediately apparent. Authorship team?Also, your bylaws may supersede the "not after" rule.Nothing in RONR precludes the calling of a special meeting for a date which is beyond the date of the next scheduled regular meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 24, 2011 at 03:45 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 03:45 PM It would appear to violate the "reason" of a special meeting to do so, however. Bottom of p. 91 - top 92.Can't have parliamentarians acting "unreasonably" now, can we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted October 24, 2011 at 03:48 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 03:48 PM It would appear to violate the "reason" of a special meeting to do so, however. Bottom of p. 91 - top 92.No, it doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest McGuire Posted October 24, 2011 at 03:57 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 03:57 PM I've read this only quickly, but isn't there something in RONR that would prevent a President from presiding over a meeting dedicated to considering a proposal to remove the President? A conflict of interest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted October 24, 2011 at 04:04 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 04:04 PM I've read this only quickly, but isn't there something in RONR that would prevent a President from presiding over a meeting dedicated to considering a proposal to remove the President? A conflict of interest?Read it again more slowly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted October 24, 2011 at 04:12 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 04:12 PM I've read this only quickly, but isn't there something in RONR that would prevent a President from presiding over a meeting dedicated to considering a proposal to remove the President? A conflict of interest?RONR says he should not preside during the consideration of such a motion. It says no such thing about his presiding over other portions of the meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Charles Brown Posted October 24, 2011 at 09:01 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 09:01 PM There is only one item on the agenda for the special meeting. That is the removal of the President from theboard and removing him/her as president. All board members have a cc of the agenda.The meeting was scedhuled to immediately follow a regular board meeting due to the fact that it is hard to get all of the members together for a phone conference at one time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted October 24, 2011 at 09:32 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 09:32 PM Nothing in RONR precludes the calling of a special meeting for a date which is beyond the date of the next scheduled regular meeting.Aside from disciplinary actions, RONR (11th ed.), pp. 660, 661, you don't view this as an infringement on the freedom of each session by putting the topic for the special meeting out of the regular meeting's reach, RONR (11th ed.), p. 87, ll. 6-21? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted October 24, 2011 at 09:37 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 09:37 PM Aside from disciplinary actions, RONR (11th ed.), pp. 660, 661, you don't view this as an infringement on the freedom of each session by putting the topic for the special meeting out of the regular meeting's reach, RONR (11th ed.), p. 87, ll. 6-21?No, because it doesn't put it out of reach of the assembly at it's next regular meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted October 24, 2011 at 09:53 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 at 09:53 PM No, because it doesn't put it out of reach of the assembly at it's next regular meeting.I think I'm going to have to chew on that one for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted October 25, 2011 at 12:19 AM Report Share Posted October 25, 2011 at 12:19 AM I think I'm going to have to chew on that one for a while. I think he is referring to the noticeable lack of any rule specifying that the regular meeting is precluded from considering the matter for which the special meeting was called. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.