Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

in executive session


Guest Church-Guy

Recommended Posts

Yes, a member of the board ccan request that the body go into executive session, although the 'request' should be considered as an implied motion to go into executive session. It can be approved by unanimous consent - meanng no vote need be taken - if no member objects. If there is an objection, then a majority vote is needed.

 

However, going into executive session does not mean that ex officio attendees must leave the meeting. Ex officio means 'by virtue of the office' and describes those who become members of a body because of some other office which they hold. They are just as much members as those elected to membership in the body.

 

Even individuals who are not members of the body may be invited to remain (by the body  as a whole) during executive session.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't exclude members ex officio members from meetings of a body they are a member of. Perhaps they will step out voluntarily? If not, the only other option I see is that you could do is create a committee that consists of all members except the ex officio members. That committee could then meet without them, but eventually, the committee would have to report to the full board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can a member of a board request that the body meet in Executive Session, meaning asking all ex-officio attendees leave the meeting for closed discussion.  Does this have to be voted on, or can it just be requested.

 

It would be a motion to go into executive session, which needs majority consent at a minimum.  But it apparently does not mean what you think it means.  Executive session means that the material discussed is, and must remain, confidential, possibly for some time.  

 

What it absolutely does NOT mean is that any members (ex-officio or otherwise) must leave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Church Guy:

 

Thanks to all those who offered info on the question regarding In Executive Session.   Yes, as you could surmize, I am on a Church Council / Board which is comprised of lay members of the Church plus the Pastor and Finanical Secretary.  The Pastor and Finanical Secretary are paid staff positions and they serve as "ex-officio", non-voting members of the Council.

 

The question was asked because the Council may want "closed discussion" and have the Pastor and Finanical Sec leave the meeting.  That is why I thought of Executive Session.

 

If that wont work, or can not work, anyone have any other ideas with realm of Roberts Rules?

 

Thanks.......Church Guy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to all those who offered info on the question regarding In Executive Session. Yes, as you could surmize, I am on a Church Council / Board which is comprised of lay members of the Church plus the Pastor and Finanical Secretary. The Pastor and Finanical Secretary are paid staff positions and they serve as "ex-officio", non-voting members of the Council.

The question was asked because the Council may want "closed discussion" and have the Pastor and Finanical Sec leave the meeting. That is why I thought of Executive Session.

If that wont work, or can not work, anyone have any other ideas with realm of Roberts Rules?

You can refer the motion to a special committee which consists of all the members of the board except the Pastor and Financial Secretary. That committee can then enter executive session. This isn't perfect, because the committee can't take action on its own. It would need to make a recommendation to the board, and then you're stuck with the ex-officio members again.

I'm afraid that's the best you can do until you amend your bylaws so that these positions are no longer ex-officio members of the board, which I would strongly advise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can refer the motion to a special committee which consists of all the members of the board except the Pastor and Financial Secretary. That committee can then enter executive session. This isn't perfect, because the committee can't take action on its own. It would need to make a recommendation to the board, and then you're stuck with the ex-officio members again.

I'm afraid that's the best you can do until you amend your bylaws so that these positions are no longer ex-officio members of the board, which I would strongly advise.

 

I don't fully agree with the "I would strongly advise" part of what Josh said. Certainly, your church could amend your bylaws to remove the pastor from being a member of the church council, but that's where RONR ends. The rest is personal opinion. This isn't the place to debate doctrine, and to be quite honest, I'm not a big fan of churches having ruling councils to begin with, but it seems to me that if a church is going to have one, the pastor should be the first member of it, no matter who else the church might put on it. If the intent is to talk about the situation without the pastor in the room, as Josh said and as I said in post #4, there is a way to do that, even if the pastor objects, but when dealing with a power struggle between the pastor (who by the very definition of his title is the leader of the church) and the board, at some point the pastor will have to be given the opportunity to hear what people are saying behind his back and to answer any charges that are made against him. RONR has a whole chapter dedicated to disciplinary procedures and your bylaws and/or doctrinal statement may have their own statements about it. It is unlikely that a change to your bylaws will allow you to do anything that the special committee method does not already allow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not qualified to speak for Josh Martin nor am I trying to. But don't you think "I strongly advise" is in the context of the OP saying they want to discuss a matter while excluding those two members?. It was suggested a committee might be helpful but in the end those two would still be able to vote on the recommendation from the committee. *IF* the church wants the two not to be a part of the proceedings, a bylaw change is the most effective way to go, as far as RONR is concerned. I don't think anyone's making an ecclesial pronouncement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not qualified to speak for Josh Martin nor am I trying to. But don't you think "I strongly advise" is in the context of the OP saying they want to discuss a matter while excluding those two members?. It was suggested a committee might be helpful but in the end those two would still be able to vote on the recommendation from the committee. *IF* the church wants the two not to be a part of the proceedings, a bylaw change is the most effective way to go, as far as RONR is concerned. I don't think anyone's making an ecclesial pronouncement.

 

It isn't clear to me that it is the church that wants to exclude the pastor. This appears to be a power struggle between the pastor and the church council. Perhaps the church council has good reason for wanting to talk about the pastor behind his back, but I would imagine the church has just as much good reason for wanting the pastor involved in church council meetings. Or at least, good reasons why they would want their next pastor involved in council meetings, even if this one is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe you're missing my point. I don't know that the church wants to exclude the pastor, either.  I simply believe that from what the OP wrote, that there is a sentiment on the council that they might be well-served to discuss a matter without these 2 employees present.

 

the question was asked because the Council may want "closed discussion" and have the Pastor and Finanical Sec leave the meeting.

 

 

And IF that's what they want to do, 2 ways of accomplishing it were presented via parliamentary procedure. That's what I was talking about in my previous post. You seem to be talking about whether or not pastors should be involved in church council meetings, which is a matter for a church to decide, but wasn't the original question. As a pastor, I'm very familiar with why pastors should be involved in such meetings.  But we're presented with a question of how (if possible) to exclude 2 ex officio members, and/or would executive session accomplish that. (No, it wouldn't.)  It's to those issues I was directing my remarks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't fully agree with the "I would strongly advise" part of what Josh said. Certainly, your church could amend your bylaws to remove the pastor from being a member of the church council, but that's where RONR ends. The rest is personal opinion. This isn't the place to debate doctrine, and to be quite honest, I'm not a big fan of churches having ruling councils to begin with, but it seems to me that if a church is going to have one, the pastor should be the first member of it, no matter who else the church might put on it. If the intent is to talk about the situation without the pastor in the room, as Josh said and as I said in post #4, there is a way to do that, even if the pastor objects, but when dealing with a power struggle between the pastor (who by the very definition of his title is the leader of the church) and the board, at some point the pastor will have to be given the opportunity to hear what people are saying behind his back and to answer any charges that are made against him. RONR has a whole chapter dedicated to disciplinary procedures and your bylaws and/or doctrinal statement may have their own statements about it. It is unlikely that a change to your bylaws will allow you to do anything that the special committee method does not already allow.

I thank Mr. Fish for his comments, because it seems that I have unwisely weighed in on a topic I have very little knowledge of. I was under the impression that this situation was analogous to the relationship between a Board of Directors and an Executive Director in a non-profit society. It appears that this is not the case, and I leave it to the church to determine whether or not these persons should be ex-officio members of the church council.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...