Executive keeping us uninformed

[Guest aging volunteer]

I have been an active member of a number of (sports) organizations, some with hundreds of paying and voting members. One common theme is that it is hard to get volunteers to serve. Another common theme is that financial reports are either not made, or consist of simply reading the current bank balance. If each expenditure and income class is listed to members, we could identify those that seemed wrong. Such a complete report need be no longer than a page per month. With nearly no info, fraud could be draining our funds and no one would ever know. Audits never happen, and there are lots of examples of missing money.

In another club, there are rules regarding expulsion, and executive expense accounts which no one is allowed to see. Can an exec be required to tell us all the rules? Does this require a motion and majority vote? Is it just common practice?

One trick used in 2011 was to declare that a member asking about over reported spending had thus violated a consitutional requirement that every member strive for unity. The money guy emailed his resignation, saying he would only come back after the exec had rid the club of the questioning member. They did his bidding right away. Speak up and you have violated this "strive for unity" and are thus subject to expulsion. Now no one dares to question anything. Has the dark side won?

Getting a motion for more complete financial reports would be messy at a meeting, and not likely to get a majority, since the exec plus their family members usually have a majority at membership meetings. Does a reqquirement for financial reports include any minimum detail?

[Gary c Tesser]

Evil wins if we let it.

[Gary c Tesser]

Oh, OK. Robert's Rules does not require a particular model of financial report (see p. 461 and 477 - 480). Those reports, and audits, are decided by the society. If the society does nothing, you see what happens.

Where did this constitutional "strive for unity" diktat in a sports club come from? IF thinking for yourselves, with the attendant possibility of differing opinion, is discouraged, why have meetings? Why allow members to vote on anything at all?

The risk of occasional messiness is the alternative to what you have.

(Soapbox, naah.)