multiple chairs at one meeting

[Guest Beata Domasnka]

Our by-laws allow the Board of Directors to select someone annually from amongst the membership to chair general members' meetings.  Recently the Board decided that they wanted someone to perform the role of a co-chair allowing the chair to "step out" and participate in the conversation.  This isn't addressed in our by-laws or policies.  We defer to Robert's Rules if an item isn't addressed already.  Is this allowed for in Robert's Rules?

It seems to me if you have a co-chair at the ready it implies that you don't intend to be impartial.

 

Thanks for your help.

Beata

[Hieu H. Huynh]

"If the committee's task is heavy and will require some time to complete, it often is advisable to appoint a vice-chairman. The anomalous title "co-chairman" should be avoided, as it causes impossible dilemmas in attempts to share the functions of a single position." (RONR 11th ed., p. 176, ll. 1-6)

 

Although this citation is in reference to committees, I think it is applicable to your situation.

[Richard Brown]

RONR and just about all of us who are regulars on this board frown upon having co-anythings.  You can't begin to imagine the problems it causes.  RONR p 176.

 

You seem to have a very strange bylaw provision re selecting the person to preside at meetings of your general membership.  Your bylaws don't provide that the president presides at all meetings? 

 

Since the bylaw provision allowing the Board to select someone from the general membership to preside at meetings of the general membership is a provision unique to your bylaws and is not covered in RONR, it will be up to your organization to interpret it.

 

However, RONR provides that not only may the chairman (presiding officer) step down and allow someone else to preside if he wants to take part in the debate, but that he should relinquish the chair in those situations.  Normally, in those situations the vice president would automatically preside.  Your situation seems to be different. 

 

RONR does provide help for you in this situation, though.  If the chairman voluntarily relinquishes the chair and no vice president is available to take over, the chairman may designate someone else to preside until the matter is disposed of and he resumes the chair.  Here is what RONR says about such a situation on page 395:

 

"To participate in debate, he must relinquish the chair; and in such a case he should turn the chair over:
    a )    to the highest-ranking vice-president present who has not spoken on the question and does not decline on the grounds of wishing to speak on it; or
     b )    if no such vice-president is in the room, to some other member qualified as in (a), whom the chair designates (and who is assumed to receive the assembly's approval by unanimous consent unless member(s) then nominate other person(s), in which case the presiding officer's choice is also treated as a nominee and the matter is decided by vote).
The presiding officer who relinquished the chair then should not return to it until the pending main question has been disposed of. . . . "

[Gary Novosielski]

Our by-laws allow the Board of Directors to select someone annually from amongst the membership to chair general members' meetings.  Recently the Board decided that they wanted someone to perform the role of a co-chair allowing the chair to "step out" and participate in the conversation.  This isn't addressed in our by-laws or policies.  We defer to Robert's Rules if an item isn't addressed already.  Is this allowed for in Robert's Rules?

It seems to me if you have a co-chair at the ready it implies that you don't intend to be impartial.

 

Thanks for your help.

Beata

 

No,  If your bylaws don't explicitly allow for this, then RONR certainly does not.

 

And if your bylaws already say "someone", I don't see how this can be interpreted to mean "some-two".

[Guest Guest]

Thanks everyone.  Yes, our by-laws have a schedule for rules of order. (Our by-laws are based on RONR.) In the schedule it states that GM meetings are "normally" the president.  If president wants to participate in topic then they hand over chairing and in brackets (usually VP).

Historically we had a  lot of presidents who didn't feel comfortable chairing the big meetings.  So we put a procedure in place that Board could appoint - annually - a member who wished to do this.  Often we hire outside chairs - especially if we feel there is going to be conflict.

 

I suspected that co-chairing wasn't addressed by RONR.

 

Thanks again.

[Richard Brown]

Historically we had a  lot of presidents who didn't feel comfortable chairing the big meetings.  So we put a procedure in place that Board could appoint - annually - a member who wished to do this.  Often we hire outside chairs - especially if we feel there is going to be conflict.

Unless your bylaws or state law prohibit it, your organization may hire a professional parliamentarian or other professional meeting facilitator to preside.  If the bylaws and rules are silent and the regular chairman consents, it may be done by majority vote or by unanimous consent.  If he objects, it will require a suspension of the rules and a two thirds vote to prevent him from presiding and to then select someone else to preside.

 

Of course, if your bylaws or special rules cover the hiring of professionals to preside, then follow whatever procedure is set out in your bylaws or rules.  The board would not have the power to do this unless there is a bylaw provision or other rule giving it such power.  Without such a rule, it is the general membership, not the board, which has the power to decide who will preside at its meetings.

[Guest Beata Domanska]

Thanks again!