Rickster55 Posted April 26, 2015 at 01:32 AM Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 at 01:32 AM When giving our monthly treasurer's report, the treasurer groups expenses into categories. A motion was made, seconded and carried by the membership to include in the Treasurer's report a breakdown to include who the check was made out to, the amount of the check and the reason for the payment. The Treasurer refuses to abide by this motion. The President also refuses to mandate that she follow the carried motion. What are the membership's options on how to correct this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted April 26, 2015 at 01:37 AM Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 at 01:37 AM Chapter XX. Then see if you can get a new treasurer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Lages Posted April 26, 2015 at 01:39 AM Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 at 01:39 AM The membership will have to decide whether to discipline the treasurer - and perhaps the president as well - for failing to carry out a legitimate order. Such discipline can trnge from a vote to censure the treasurer, to removing him from office, to expulsion from the society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g40 Posted April 26, 2015 at 09:23 PM Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 at 09:23 PM While it seems very likely that the Treasurer should comply with this approved motion, as well as it seeming reasonable, nonetheless it is possible that the Treasurer may be justified. Has the Treasurer (and the President who seems to back the Treasurer) given any reason(s) or justification for refusal to comply? I am the Treasurer of an organization, and there may be membership or Board motions passed where I would refuse to comply because the required actions conflicted with applicable law or regulation, were not within the powers of the entity (membership or board) or some other reason(s). If the Treasurer does have legitimate (or what seem to be legitimate) reasons for non-compliance, then it seems to me there probably are alternatives to accomplishing the desired objective. It would not be proper for the Treasurer to refuse because he/she is stealing/embezzling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted April 26, 2015 at 09:27 PM Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 at 09:27 PM It would not be proper for the Treasurer to refuse because he/she is stealing/embezzling. Well, in this instance we know he is not stealing/embezzling. The President also refuses to mandate that she follow the carried motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.