Canceling a meeting

[dd166]

Our Prez canceled a regular meeting due to weather. Our by laws don't provide for meeting cancelation. She knew that she would be violating the bylaws by canceling but felt she had no choice. Two questions:

1) Are there any ramifications?

2) Can she move agenda items that were to be voted on at the canceled regular meeting to the next scheduled regular meeting? Or does she need to hold a special meeting for those items to be voted on?

[Guest Edgar]

1. If you let your president get away with this one, who knows what she'll try to get away with next.

2. See FAQ #14. Unless there's something that can't wait until the next regular meeting, there's no need for a special meeting.

[dd166]

Thanks for the response. Does the President risk being held accountable by a RRoO action? If so, what are the potential actions?

[Guest Edgar]

You could discipline the president. Anything from a slap on the wrist (e.g. a motion of censure) to removal from office to expulsion from the organization. But I suspect all that would be overkill. Maybe just a friendly chat. And a copy of RONR In Brief.

If the "cancellation" was related to the recent snowstorm in the Northeast U.S. I would think the president had the best of intentions. She didn't really cancel the meeting, she just told everyone to stay home. Which is not to say that, if a few stalwart members made it in, the meeting could not have been held. A lot depends on the circumstances (e.g. how far the members had to travel). A meeting of a NYC co-op could take place no matter how bad the weather.

[Chris Harrison]

You in theory could subject the President to disciplinary actions ranging from being censured (basically the assembly saying "bad girl" without any other action being taken), to removal from office, to expulsion from Membership. However, you all should consider whether justice should be tempered with mercy (or even getting a free pass this time) in this situation.

[Guest Jim]

It seems to me that in failing to themselves attend the meeting, in spite of its contending to have been "cancelled", and there vote a chair pro tem and a secretary and proceed to have the meeting without the president, undertaking only such business as a quorum would allow, it would be inappropriate for the members to be censuring the president.

Is it not also germaine that this action occurred outside of a meeting? What are the members going to do ... appoint an investigative committee?

Just one opinion (and not that of a registered parliamentarian) but I might think the better course would be to ensure that members know that, in future instances of inclement weather, as many as desire to carry ahead with the meeting anyway, in their desire to further the business of the society, may do so provided they have (a) vote a chair pro tem and a secretary and ( if they achieve a quorum, to properly conduct the business that is supposed to be conducted at that meeting.

??

[Bruce Lages]

I'm curious to know what you mean by "undertaking only such business as a quorum would allow".

[Guest Goopher]

I'm curious to know what you mean by "undertaking only such business as a quorum would allow".

Scilicit, "as [the presence of] a quorum"?

[Guest Jim]

I'm curious to know what you mean by "undertaking only such business as a quorum would allow".

Assuming that the topic starter's bylaws make no special provisions, absent which we are assuming RONR to be their designated parliamentary authority (as I suppose this forum always does, although not in every case correctly), it is possible that no quorum had been achieved among any members who did turn up.

If that was the case, and notwithstanding whether this had been the result of the president's communication, which stands to reason, then the inquorate assembly would not, under RONR, have been authorized to do very much. Unless I am mistaken.

[Guest Edgar]

. . . the inquorate assembly would not, under RONR, have been authorized to do very much.

Yes, but your previous statement referred to "only such business as [the presence of] a quorum would allow, not to the very limited business permitted in the absence of a quorum. Hence Mr. Lages' (and my) curiosity.

[Guest Jim]

Can she move agenda items that were to be voted on at the canceled regular meeting to the next scheduled regular meeting? Or does she need to hold a special meeting for those items to be voted on?

Is "can she" the right question?

Meaning, if "items that were to be voted on" had already been resolved would be "general orders" for the "next regular meeting", then would these items appear automatically in the order of business (agenda) for whatever would be the next regular meeting i.e. the one after the meeting which did not "happen"?

[Guest Jim]

Yes, but your previous statement referred to "only such business as [the presence of] a quorum would allow.

I would have thought that no quorum can achieve to do business absent allowing said business to happen <grin>.

I recognize this line of clarification is without knowing whether the original asker remains interested in these further clarifications.

[Dan Honemann]

Is "can she" the right question?

Meaning, if "items that were to be voted on" had already been resolved would be "general orders" for the "next regular meeting", then would these items appear automatically in the order of business (agenda) for whatever would be the next regular meeting i.e. the one after the meeting which did not "happen"?

I'll stick with "can she".

[Josh Martin]

Is it not also germaine that this action occurred outside of a meeting? What are the members going to do ... appoint an investigative committee?

Yes, it matters that the action occurred outside of a meeting. Unless the society has its own rules for discipline, or has the right Bylaws language regarding the term of office (see FAQ #20), the society would need to follow the formal disciplinary procedures in RONR, and appointing an investigative committee is the first step. Simply adopting a motion to censure, however, doesn't require formal disciplinary procedures.

Whether the society should discipline the President is up to the society.

Meaning, if "items that were to be voted on" had already been resolved would be "general orders" for the "next regular meeting", then would these items appear automatically in the order of business (agenda) for whatever would be the next regular meeting i.e. the one after the meeting which did not "happen"?

It's possible some items would automatically carry over, such as items which were under Unfinished Business or items which had been set as a general order for that meeting at a previous meeting (both would come up under Unfinished Business at the next meeting).

But I suspect that there were also items which were on the draft agenda which had not yet been set as general orders. Since the assembly did not meet, it could not approve the agenda, and therefore those items did not become general orders. These items would not automatically be part of the order of business for the following meeting, but there's nothing wrong with placing them on the draft agenda.

[Shmuel Gerber]

Does the President risk being held accountable by a RRoO action? If so, what are the potential actions?

In this case, I think it is very unlikely that any action will be taken against the president. Probably the members will be more annoyed by those who complain that the cancellation was invalid. You know what they say -- the road to heaven is paved with good intentions, and ignorance is nine-tenths of the law. Or something like that. (It sounds much better in the original Latin.)