Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums
Bruce Lages

Committee members appointed by chair

Recommended Posts

In a related thread on the General Discussion board, Shmuel Gerber brought up the stipulation in RONR that when the chair appoints members to a committee, those names must be announced to the assembly, and "until such announcement is made, the committee cannot act." (p. 496, ll.8-11) I have two questions regarding this statement:

 

1)  Are the words "the committee may not act" interpreted to mean that the committee may not conduct any business, or that the committee may not even meet?

 

2)  Is the requirement for the appointments to be announced to the assembly simply a pro forma notice to the assembly, or does this imply that. even when the bylaws stipulate that the chair has the authority to appoint committee members, the assembly has some ability to alter such appointments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1)  Are the words "the committee may not act" interpreted to mean that the committee may not conduct any business, or that the committee may not even meet?

Well, if the president hasn't leaked the names before announcing them at a meeting, they can't meet because they don't know who they are.  But since the word is "act", but certainly could have been "meet" if that was intended, I'd say they can meet, but not act--once they find out who they are.

 

2)  Is the requirement for the appointments to be announced to the assembly simply a pro forma notice to the assembly, or does this imply that. even when the bylaws stipulate that the chair has the authority to appoint committee members, the assembly has some ability to alter such appointments?

I don't see any reason to assume that anyone can alter the appointments, absent some "consent" language in the rule. Well, apart from someone declining the appointment which, I assume, is possible unless such service has been defined as a duty in the bylaws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if the president hasn't leaked the names before announcing them at a meeting, they can't meet because they don't know who they are.  But since the word is "act", but certainly could have been "meet" if that was intended, I'd say they can meet, but not act--once they find out who they are.

 

 

I think it's more likely that the appointed committee members know who they are before the rest of the assembly is notified of the appointments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a related thread on the General Discussion board, Shmuel Gerber brought up the stipulation in RONR that when the chair appoints members to a committee, those names must be announced to the assembly, and "until such announcement is made, the committee cannot act." (p. 496, ll.8-11) I have two questions regarding this statement:

 

1)  Are the words "the committee may not act" interpreted to mean that the committee may not conduct any business, or that the committee may not even meet?

 

2)  Is the requirement for the appointments to be announced to the assembly simply a pro forma notice to the assembly, or does this imply that. even when the bylaws stipulate that the chair has the authority to appoint committee members, the assembly has some ability to alter such appointments?

 

1) I think the words "the committee cannot act" should be interpreted to mean that the committee cannot conduct any business, but what sense would there be in holding a meeting if not to conduct business?

 

2) The announcement of the names of committee appointees must be made during a meeting so that the appointments can be recorded in the minutes. It also gives members an opportunity to raise points of order if, for example, it is felt that an appointee is not qualified to serve for some reason or other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2) The announcement of the names of committee appointees must be made during a meeting so that the appointments can be recorded in the minutes. It also gives members an opportunity to raise points of order if, for example, it is felt that an appointee is not qualified to serve for some reason or other.

 

But wouldn't this apply to any appointments made by the president? If not, why are committees singled out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But wouldn't this apply to any appointments made by the president? If not, why are committees singled out?

 

Well, committees are "singled out" in what is said on page 496 because page 496 is in the part of the book dealing with appointment of committees.

 

What other appointments do you want to talk about (and why in a thread entitled "Committee members appointed by chair")?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, committees are "singled out" in what is said on page 496 because page 496 is in the part of the book dealing with appointment of committees.

 

What other appointments do you want to talk about (and why in a thread entitled "Committee members appointed by chair")?

 

I guess I'd like to be directed to the page where RONR says that all appointments by the president are only "pending" (or whatever their status is) until they're announced at the next meeting.

 

I find it hard to understand why, in a thread entitled "Committee members appointed by chair", questioning why only committee members fall under this rule (if, indeed, they are the only appointees who do) lies outside the scope of the topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nowhere in RONR  is there anything that says that appointments by the president are only "pending" until they're announced at the next meeting.

 

And yet when the president names members to a committee that committee is in some sort of suspended animation until the president announces his appointments at the next meeting. Or maybe I've got that wrong. In any event, I'll not go further out on this limb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet when the president names members to a committee that committee is in some sort of suspended animation until the president announces his appointments at the next meeting. Or maybe I've got that wrong. In any event, I'll not go further out on this limb.

 

Yeah, you've got it wrong.

 

And I still don't understand what appointments by the president other than committee appointments concern you. RONR refers to the president's appointment of a parliamentarian, so is that it? What other reference to appointments by the president do you have in mind?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If an association meets only quarterly (or less frequently) doesn't this rule rather hamstring an association if the group authorized the president to make appointments after the meeting adjourns (p. 469 lines 12-17)?  

 

Or is such a "recess appointment" somehow an exception to the "cannot act" rule?   If so, it should be highlighted as such (RONR/12?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If an association meets only quarterly (or less frequently) doesn't this rule rather hamstring an association if the group authorized the president to make appointments after the meeting adjourns (p. 469 lines 12-17)?  

 

Or is such a "recess appointment" somehow an exception to the "cannot act" rule?   If so, it should be highlighted as such (RONR/12?).

 

Yes, a committee can act before its membership has been announced to the assembly if the assembly has authorized the president to appoint the committee's members after the meeting has adjourned (see the sentence which begins on the last line of page 257 in PL).

 

I agree that this could be made clearer in RONR, both on page 175 and on page 496.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...