Ruling by Chairperson prevents new Board from being elected.

[Scruples98]

At today's Annual General Meeting the Chairperson has ruled the meeting out of order because the financial statements do not include a balance sheet. We are about to elect a new board. According to this ruling the new board cannot be elected because the meeting is out of order according to the Chairperson. Is there a basis in Roberts Rules upon which a member or the membership may object to the Chairperson's ruling that the annual meeting is out of order and a new Board cannot be elected?

[Josh Martin]

At today's Annual General Meeting the Chairperson has ruled the meeting out of order because the financial statements do not include a balance sheet.

 

There is nothing in RONR which suggests that a meeting is out of order because the financial statements do not include a balance sheet.

 

Is there a basis in Roberts Rules upon which a member or the membership may object to the Chairperson's ruling that the annual meeting is out of order and a new Board cannot be elected?

 

What, is the meeting still in progress?

 

Yes, a member may Appeal from the decision of the chair. This motion requires a second and is debatable, and members can debate why they agree or disagree with the chair's ruling. Members may only speak once in debate on an appeal, except the chair, who can speak twice - he has the right to speak first and last on an appeal. After debate is completed, the question is put as "Shall the decision of the chair be sustained?" Members who agree with the chair's ruling vote yes, and members who disagree vote no. A majority vote in the negative is required to overturn the chair's ruling. See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 255-260 for more information.

[Scruples98]

Yes, the meeting is in progress.  I appreciate the quick response.  A request was made for a balance sheet to be provided by the bookkeeper which has been produced. The Chair has relented and the meeting is proceeding normally. 

 

I still have the question concerning the legitimacy of a meeting. If the membership appeals the chairs ruling and the ruling is over turned and the meeting proceeds with the new board being elected, that election would be legitimate even if later proceedings found that the lack of a balance sheet was inappropriate, it would seem to me that general parliamentary principles would affirm the legitimacy of a meeting even if certain details where not addressed. 

 

Is there precedent for overturning a membership decision because the legitimacy of a meeting was called into question?

[Guest Edgar]

Is there precedent for overturning a membership decision because the legitimacy of a meeting was called into question?

 

Yes. For example, if the bylaws require, say, thirty-days notice to all members and such notice wasn't provide (either not in time or not to all members), then any business conducted at such a meeting would be null and void.

 

But minor glitches (such as an incomplete report) would not usually invalidate an otherwise legitimate meeting.

[Scruples98]

I thought so. Chairperson was a little too ready to move the meeting out of order. I would have appealed that ruling but the problem was addressed so we avoided the confusion. It is helpful to have people watching this forum and able to respond in a timely manner. Thank you for doing that!

[David A Foulkes]

There is nothing in RONR which suggests that a meeting is out of order because the financial statements do not include a balance sheet.

 

Or for any other reason, right??

[Josh Martin]

Or for any other reason, right??

 

No. As Edgar suggested, a meeting may be invalid if it was not properly called.

[Guest Edgar]

There is nothing in RONR which suggests that a meeting is out of order because . . .

Or for any other reason, right?

No. As Edgar suggested, a meeting may be invalid if it was not properly called.

 

I have to think that Mr. Foulkes was objecting to using the term "out of order" to refer to an illegitimate meeting.

[Gary Novosielski]

At today's Annual General Meeting the Chairperson has ruled the meeting out of order because the financial statements do not include a balance sheet. We are about to elect a new board. According to this ruling the new board cannot be elected because the meeting is out of order according to the Chairperson. Is there a basis in Roberts Rules upon which a member or the membership may object to the Chairperson's ruling that the annual meeting is out of order and a new Board cannot be elected?

 

If such a ruling were spread around the tomato plants, they would grow like crazy.