Rocky Mountain Man Posted December 17, 2013 at 05:30 PM Report Share Posted December 17, 2013 at 05:30 PM Good Day, There is a situation on our board that is requiring the board to act as a hearing panel to consider if a complaint brought against two of our officers has merit to be heard in a full board inquiry. If the complaint hold merit then the board will have to hear the complaint and deliberate on the quest to remove or not remove these officers.There is confussion on how to interprute the By-laws in regards to who can be present during the deliberation to determin merit of the complaint. Our Vice President interpruts it as neither the two officers (defendents) nor the member that allowed the complaint to be brought before the board can be present. Other members of our board including myself interprate it to say they can't be considered as part of the majority. It is also unanamously understood as writen in our By-laws that these three individuals will not vote on the matter. However they may have facts that are pertinent to the board making a proper decisssion. How should this be interpreted? Our By-law is as follows, "The Board shall consider the sworn statement and Board member’s response in closed session. If a majority of the members of the Board present (not including the Board member charged and also not including any Board member presenting or approving the sworn statement) believes the charges merit a hearing, the Board shall set a time for a special meeting of the Board for a full hearing, which shall be conducted in accordance with the policies and procedures set forth in the Rules for such hearings." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted December 17, 2013 at 05:35 PM Report Share Posted December 17, 2013 at 05:35 PM Good Day, There is a situation on our board that is requiring the board to act as a hearing panel to consider if a complaint brought against two of our officers has merit to be heard in a full board inquiry. If the complaint hold merit then the board will have to hear the complaint and deliberate on the quest to remove or not remove these officers.There is confussion on how to interprute the By-laws in regards to who can be present during the deliberation to determin merit of the complaint. Our Vice President interpruts it as neither the two officers (defendents) nor the member that allowed the complaint to be brought before the board can be present. Other members of our board including myself interprate it to say they can't be considered as part of the majority. It is also unanamously understood as writen in our By-laws that these three individuals will not vote on the matter. However they may have facts that are pertinent to the board making a proper decisssion. How should this be interpreted? Our By-law is as follows, "The Board shall consider the sworn statement and Board member’s response in closed session. If a majority of the members of the Board present (not including the Board member charged and also not including any Board member presenting or approving the sworn statement) believes the charges merit a hearing, the Board shall set a time for a special meeting of the Board for a full hearing, which shall be conducted in accordance with the policies and procedures set forth in the Rules for such hearings." It's ultimately up to the organization to interpret its own bylaws. See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 588-591 for some Principles of Interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sMargaret Posted December 18, 2013 at 05:35 PM Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 at 05:35 PM The board, as a whole, needs to make this determination. Have the chair make a ruling as to whether or not these members can be present. If you disagree, appeal from the decision of the chair. Majority vote determines what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.