Motion to purchase equip passed, Treasurer refuses to sign check

[Guest CVE]

At our monthly PTO meeting we voted to purchase playground equipment. The Treasurer is now refusing to sign the check to purchase the equipment. Our by-laws state that the Treasurer & President (or Parliamentarian in the absence of the President) must sign the checks. The Treasurer is stating that she & others do not believe that the motion to purchase the equipment was worded correctly. However the Treasurer & others were at this meeting & did not bring up any argument or discussion on the way the motion was worded. In an Executive meeting held today the Treasurer handed over the checkbook to the President. She signed checks for other items but refused to sign for the equipment. As Parliamentarian, I explained to her that our by-laws state that her signature has to b on the check. She again refused, & proceeded to leave the meeting. My question is, even if she doesn't agree with the motion that passed, doesn't she still have the obligation as Treasurer to sign the check?

[Guest Nancy N.]

This almost looks like a trick question. I presume that the treasurer has not before shirked her responsibility (what else does a treasurer do, but move money in, move money out, and keep track of it?) -- what changed here? What is

she & others do not believe that the motion to purchase the equipment was worded correctly

supposed to mean?

Was

the Treasurer handed over the checkbook to the President

understood to be a resignation?

even if she doesn't agree with the motion that passed, doesn't she still have the obligation as Treasurer to sign the check?

What rationale can there be against this?

capcha trial 1

[Guest Edgar]

My question is, even if she doesn't agree with the motion that passed, doesn't she still have the obligation as Treasurer to sign the check?

Perhaps, but she may feel she has an even greater obligation not to, at least in her eyes, waste the association's money. In which case she should probably resign or be removed from office so you can replace her.

By the way, you might want to re-think that rule allowing the parliamentarian to sign checks in the president's absent. Seems to me the vice-president would be a more logical choice in that instance. Or the secretary. But the parliamentarian? Really?

[sMargaret]

What is the Treasurer's actual objection? I'm not sure if she personally doesn't agree with an approved purchase, or if she doesn't think the motion passed supports what she's being told to do.

[Josh Martin]

The Treasurer is stating that she & others do not believe that the motion to purchase the equipment was worded correctly.

Has the Treasurer explained what she means by this? If, for instance, there is question about whether the motion was recorded in the minutes accurately or something of that nature, then that's a valid concern. On the other hand, if Treasurer just doesn't like how the motion was worded by the assembly, she doesn't have a leg to stand on.

However the Treasurer & others were at this meeting & did not bring up any argument or discussion on the way the motion was worded.

That's good to know, and it may well make a difference in the answer, but we'll first need to be clearer on the exact nature of the Treasurer's objection.

My question is, even if she doesn't agree with the motion that passed, doesn't she still have the obligation as Treasurer to sign the check?

Absolutely, and if that's really what it comes down to, you might need a new Treasurer.