special meeting cancelled

[Guest ec]

The president called a special meeting of the board of directors.

The reason the meeting was called:

The president filed charges against a member of the club.

 

The member resigned from the club.

Received a notice from the secretary that the meeting has been cancelled and the charges would remain on file.

 

The board has not accepted the resignation.

We usually do this at our monthly board meeting.

 

I would think that we should proceed with special board meeting to address the issue?

Thanks

 

 

 

[jstackpo]

I agree.   Although your bylaws may (I trust they do) give the president the authority to call a special meeting, that doesn't give him the authority to cancel it (unless that is in the bylaws, too).

[Transpower]

RONR (11th ed.), p. 292, ll. 8-10:  "A resignation sent in to escape charges need not be accepted.  The charges may be preferred and the trial should proceed the same as if the resignation had not been sent in."  This specifically applies to members who are in arrears of dues.  Is that your situation?

[Rev Ed]

If the resignation has not been accepted, then don't accept it and continue with the meeting - also the meeting cannot be cancelled unless the By-laws allow for it.

[Richard Brown]

If the resignation has not been accepted, then don't accept it and continue with the meeting - also the meeting cannot be cancelled unless the By-laws allow for it.

I agree that RONR provides no means of canceling a special meeting once called.  And I agree that the society is not obligated to accept the resignation of a member who is facing discipline.

 

However, from a purely practical, real-life standpoint, such a resignation often renders the necessity or the desire for any further disciplinary procedures moot.  The membership, for a variety of reasons, is often very happy with the resignation and prefers to leave the matter at that.  For a variety of reasons, one of which is the simple inconvenience of having to attend a special meeting, the membership (or the board) of a society would prefer to "cancel" the special meeting and just accept the resignation at the next regular meeting.

 

If such is the case, and the feelings of the membership (or the board, as the case may be) are fairly obvious to the president (or even if they are not obvious), the president might call or email the other board members and ask if they have any objection to "canceling" the meeting.   If everyone (or a clear majority) wants  to cancel the meeting, then if the president announces that the meeting has been cancelled, it is highly unlikely that anyone... and especially not a quorum.... would show up.

 

Is that according to "Hoyle", er, RONR?  No, except in the sense that if a quorum doesn't show up no business can be conducted.  But as a practical matter, it is how many societies and boards operate in real life.  If the reason for a special meeting becomes moot (or a blizzard blows in), they cancel the meeting. 

 

If they want to dot the "i's" and cross the "t's", I suppose one or two members can show up at the appointed time and place and call the meeting to order and then adjourn due to lack of a quorum.  But should this really be necessary if all members of the board express agreement by phone that they want to cancel the meeting and accept the guy's resignation?

 

I am not going to tell the members of such an organization that they should not accept a resignation or that they must have the special meeting even if they have decided that they don't want it any more.  I would limit my advice to telling them that RONR provides no method of canceling a special meeting, but that if no one or less than a quorum show up, they can't conduct any business anyway.  They know their situation and they know whether they want to continue to pursue disciplinary charges.

[Josh Martin]

I agree that RONR provides no means of canceling a special meeting once called.  And I agree that the society is not obligated to accept the resignation of a member who is facing discipline.

 

However, from a purely practical, real-life standpoint, such a resignation often renders the necessity or the desire for any further disciplinary procedures moot.  The membership, for a variety of reasons, is often very happy with the resignation and prefers to leave the matter at that.  For a variety of reasons, one of which is the simple inconvenience of having to attend a special meeting, the membership (or the board) of a society would prefer to "cancel" the special meeting and just accept the resignation at the next regular meeting.

 

If such is the case, and the feelings of the membership (or the board, as the case may be) are fairly obvious to the president (or even if they are not obvious), the president might call or email the other board members and ask if they have any objection to "canceling" the meeting.   If everyone (or a clear majority) wants  to cancel the meeting, then if the president announces that the meeting has been cancelled, it is highly unlikely that anyone... and especially not a quorum.... would show up.

 

Is that according to "Hoyle", er, RONR?  No, except in the sense that if a quorum doesn't show up no business can be conducted.  But as a practical matter, it is how many societies and boards operate in real life.  If the reason for a special meeting becomes moot (or a blizzard blows in), they cancel the meeting. 

 

If they want to dot the "i's" and cross the "t's", I suppose one or two members can show up at the appointed time and place and call the meeting to order and then adjourn due to lack of a quorum.  But should this really be necessary if all members of the board express agreement by phone that they want to cancel the meeting and accept the guy's resignation?

 

I am not going to tell the members of such an organization that they should not accept a resignation or that they must have the special meeting even if they have decided that they don't want it any more.  I would limit my advice to telling them that RONR provides no method of canceling a special meeting, but that if no one or less than a quorum show up, they can't conduct any business anyway.  They know their situation and they know whether they want to continue to pursue disciplinary charges.

It seems to me that the board should hold the special meeting, at which time it is free to accept the resignation (or not, as it wishes). The question of accepting the resignation seems relevant to the called purpose to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the member.

[Richard Brown]

It seems to me that the board should hold the special meeting, at which time it is free to accept the resignation (or not, as it wishes). The question of accepting the resignation seems relevant to the called purpose to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the member.

I tend to agree that the board could probably accept the resignation at the special meeting.  I considered saying in my original post that the board could decide to do that, but refrained from making that statement because we don't know exactly what the notice for the special meeting said and I questioned whether the board would have the authority to accept the resignation at the special meeting.  I think it may depend on what the call of the meeting said.   I do agree that the resignation may be closely enough related to the purpose of the meeting that the board could accept it.... I just am not certain of that point based on the information guest ec provided.  However, the more I think about it, the more I agree with you on that point. 

[DanielEHayes]

I tend to agree that the board could probably accept the resignation at the special meeting.  I considered saying in my original post that the board could decide to do that, but refrained from making that statement because we don't know exactly what the notice for the special meeting said and I questioned whether the board would have the authority to accept the resignation at the special meeting.  I think it may depend on what the call of the meeting said.   I do agree that the resignation may be closely enough related to the purpose of the meeting that the board could accept it.... I just am not certain of that point based on the information guest ec provided.  However, the more I think about it, the more I agree with you on that point.

Since a resignation is a likely outcome of bringing a matter to trial wouldn't accepting a resignation be germane to the proceedings and in order for the Special Meeting if it was called for the purpose of discipline?

[Edgar Guest]

Since a resignation is a likely outcome of bringing a matter to trial . . . 

 

One of the few reasons for not accepting rejecting a resignation is to keep the member under the disciplinary jurisdiction of the society. The difference between resigning and being removed from office (or expelled from membership) might have future implications (such as being eligible to hold office or becoming a member again).

[Guest ec]

I would like thank everyone for their input on this subject.

 

My question was based more on the obligation of the board of directors to hear the complaint and validate the complaint even though the member's letter stated the resignation was immediate.

 

Our by-laws state that the board shall take up the resignation at the next board meeting.

Thanks

[Guest ec]

The reason the meeting was called was to address the complaint against the member and only that could be discussed.

[jstackpo]

Well... yeah...  but .... the member in question is still a member until his resignation is accepted (unless bylaws say something different).  So you could have still worked over the complaint in the special meeting even though his resignation was pending.

[Guest ec]

Yes I agree Thanks you

The meeting was cancelled by the presidant.

There are no provisions in our BY-LAWS that address cancelling a meeting.

 

[Guest ec]

sorry about the grammar!

[jstackpo]

Next time this happens get a quorum's worth of friends to show up at the "canceled" meeting anyway, and take care of whatever the meeting was called for.  The presidential cancellation was entirely improper and deserved to be ignored.