Guest TriciaJ Posted November 7, 2011 at 06:24 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 06:24 PM Our youth League is having a lot of issuesJust had an election for the board that the current president did not want to have (different issue all together). When only the people who question president on his actions were nominated, he went and recruited people to run against them. Then during the election he told members who to vote for I thought he could not do that but he stated RONR states he can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted November 7, 2011 at 06:33 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 06:33 PM There is nothing wrong (under RONR) with the President recruiting people to run for office (he has just as much stake in the organization as any other member). Also, nothing in RONR prevents the President from telling members who to vote for though they are under no obligation under RONR to do so (and shame on them for going along with his demands-unless they wanted to vote for those people in the first place). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted November 7, 2011 at 06:36 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 06:36 PM I thought he could not do that but he stated RONR states he can.Then ask him to show you the page. Odd are he doesn't even own a copy of the book.Outside of a meeting, he's free to "recruit" candidates and campaign for them. During the meeting (e.g. during the election), he's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted November 7, 2011 at 06:37 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 06:37 PM There is nothing wrong (under RONR) with the President recruiting people to run for office (he has just as much stake in the organization as any other member). Also, nothing in RONR prevents the President from telling members who to vote for though they are under no obligation under RONR to do so (and shame on them for going along with his demands-unless they wanted to vote for those people in the first place).However, it would not be appropriate for him to do so while presiding, under the formal rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TriciaJ Posted November 7, 2011 at 06:52 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 06:52 PM Thank you, He has said in the past that he will break the rules to get what he wants and he wants a board that will say yes sir to him! And will not question him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted November 7, 2011 at 07:04 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 07:04 PM He has said in the past that he will break the rules to get what he wants and he wants a board that will say yes sir to him! And will not question him!Sounds like time for a new President. See FAQ #20 for details. http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted November 7, 2011 at 07:30 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 07:30 PM Thank you, He has said in the past that he will break the rules to get what he wants and he wants a board that will say yes sir to him! And will not question him!Sounds like my kind of guy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TriciaJ Posted November 7, 2011 at 07:47 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 07:47 PM the new bylaws (that were not voted on my anyone) state that it takes 100% board aprroval to remove him and since he appointed the board and most are his friends it won't happen ( the new bylaws state that he can appoint the whole board and when a board member wanted it changed, the president made the motion to change it so he can appoint 3 people and the members vote on 3 and told the members to vote for his not the other board members motion)Like I said it is a BIG HUGE Mess!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted November 7, 2011 at 07:56 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 07:56 PM the new bylaws (that were not voted on by anyone) state . . .If no one voted on them, what makes you (or anyone else) think they're your new bylaws?Sounds like it might be time for the membership to grab the pitchforks and torches and storm the castle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted November 7, 2011 at 07:56 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 07:56 PM the new bylaws (that were not voted on my anyone) state that it takes 100% board aprroval to remove him and since he appointed the board and most are his friends it won't happen ( the new bylaws state that he can appoint the whole board and when a board member wanted it changed, the president made the motion to change it so he can appoint 3 people and the members vote on 3 and told the members to vote for his not the other board members motion)Like I said it is a BIG HUGE Mess!! Huh?? What did the previous bylaws say about their method of amendment? If that method wasn't followed, your organization doesn't have 'new bylaws.'Of course, it does take some action on the part of the membership to enforce adherence to the rules -- if people just do whatever your President (read Dictator) orders, you're out of luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted November 7, 2011 at 07:57 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 07:57 PM So if the bylaws weren't voted on by anyone then they weren't validly adopted and (assuming you haven't had properly adopted bylaws in the past) you don't have bylaws at all. Time to get rid of the bum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TriciaJ Posted November 7, 2011 at 09:27 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 09:27 PM If no one voted on them, what makes you (or anyone else) think they're your new bylaws?Sounds like it might be time for the membership to grab the pitchforks and torches and storm the castle.The bylaws are posted on the website for our league and no one ever voted on them and we were told by a board member that since they were posted for all to view they are valid. I told him I wanted a vote to remove the president and was told that the new bylaws only allow the board to do it and they are not going to.We are trying to storm the castle. Some how what ever he says people believe, he could sell you the Golden Gate Bridge! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BryanSullo Posted November 7, 2011 at 09:35 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 09:35 PM Unless the previous bylaws had a provision saying they could be amended by posting the amended bylaws on the league Web site (which I highly doubt) these new ones aren't valid.As for your president, it's amazing how some people can get so drunk on so little power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted November 7, 2011 at 09:55 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 09:55 PM The bylaws are posted on the website for our league and no one ever voted on them and we were told by a board member that since they were posted for all to view they are valid. I told him I wanted a vote to remove the president and was told that the new bylaws only allow the board to do it and they are not going to.We are trying to storm the castle. Some how what ever he says people believe, he could sell you the Golden Gate Bridge!Wow, that's a novel and astonishing concept! Posting new bylaws on a website makes them valid Is there any record of the previous bylaws? Do some members have copies tucked away in old files? Note that the authoritative history of bylaws amendments should be found in the past minutes of the organization. Any member has a right to view the minutes of past membership meetings. Note also that the general membership, by majority vote at a general membership meeting, can order the reading of the minutes of any and all board meetings that the general membership wishes to hear (in case the board is trying to keep a cloak of secrecy over its own actions).edited, upon prompting from Mr. Tesser: the above should have been:by two-thirds vote OR by majority vote with previous notice OR by majority vote of the entire membership (RONR 11th ed. p. 487) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted November 7, 2011 at 11:23 PM Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 at 11:23 PM Just in case....(Understating things by a tad)...If you anticipate that you mighthave continuing parliamentarydifficulties or problems youmight want to get in touch witha real live professionalparliamentarian in your area(not virtual ones like us)for consultations.Contact either (or both) the ...National Association of Parliamentarians213 South Main St.Independence, MO 64050-3850Phone: 888-627-2929Fax: 816-833-3893; e-mail: hq@NAP2.org <<www.parliamentarians.org>>orAmerican Institute of Parliamentarians550M Ritchie Highway #271Severna Park, MD 21146Phone: 888-664-0428Fax: 410-544-4640e-mail: aip@aipparl.org<<www.aipparl.org>>for a reference or information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted November 8, 2011 at 02:02 PM Report Share Posted November 8, 2011 at 02:02 PM The bylaws are posted on the website for our league and no one ever voted on them and we were told by a board member that since they were posted for all to view they are valid. I told him I wanted a vote to remove the president and was told that the new bylaws only allow the board to do it and they are not going to.We are trying to storm the castle. Some how what ever he says people believe, he could sell you the Golden Gate Bridge!He will succeed in playing shepherd only so long as the members persist in playing sheep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted November 8, 2011 at 02:09 PM Report Share Posted November 8, 2011 at 02:09 PM Just out of curiosty, do the bylaws say, "These bylaws may be amended at any time by posting to a website?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.