Chairperson

[Guest Guest]

Hello!

 

I have reviewed RONR, but was hoping for further clarification on the role of the Chair. 

 

The Chairperson of the organization that I am referring to is not a members of the board, so he/she is unable to cast a vote. Most of the information that I find regarding the roles and responsibilities of the presiding officer are if he/she is also the President or a member of the board. My inquiry is how active should our Chairperson be in asking questions, providing answers, and offering context if he/she is not a member of the board?

 

The Chair has vast experience within the organization, but it could be interpreted that the questions he/she inquires on are intended to sway opinion without explicit stating opinion. These questions are mostly intended to point out areas that the Chairperson finds to be a weakness without explicitly stating such. Most board members do not notice or are not concerned with this as they are not experienced, but it is evident that there are several Directors whom do not approve of our active Chair. 

 

There is no mention of the role of the Chair within policy, except that the Chairperson have an unbiased enforcement of the rules outlined in the governing documents, and that the meeting is run in compliance with RONR.

 

I hope someone can help me better understand what I should be expecting from my non-board member Chairperson!

 

Thanks.

 

 

[Edgar Guest]

The Chairperson of the organization that I am referring to is not a member of the board . . . 

 

The presiding officer of an organization is usually called the president. The presiding officer of a board is usually called the chair (or chairman or chairperson). This isn't a hard-and-fast rule but it can avoid confusion.

 

If the presiding officer of your organization isn't a member of the board than she (or he? I assume you know which) has no more right to attend, or speak at, board meetings than anyone else who isn't a member of the board.

[Guest Guest]

Hi Edgar, thanks for your reply. 

 

Years back the organization determined it was in the best interest of the Board to hire an external Chair. This individual does not run in an election, but is hired by the Board of Directors on the recommendation of the Executive Council. So, if this is the case then the Chairperson should not be asking questions, providing context, or answering questions?

[Edgar Guest]

Years back the organization determined it was in the best interest of the Board to hire an external Chair. 

 

Well, in your first post you referred to "the Chairperson of the organization". Now it seems you may be referring to the chair of the board. Which is it?

[Guest Guest]

Although they have various responsibilities, their primary duty is to serve as the Chairperson for the Board of Directors. 

 

I apologize for the confusion. 

[Edgar Guest]

When you say "they" are you referring to one person?

 

And is this person both the presiding officer of the organization and the presiding officer of the board?

 

But this person is not a member of the board?

 

If the presiding officer at a meeting of the board is not a member of the board then I would think he (she? they?) should stick to presiding and refrain from further participation.

 

But stay tuned for other replies.

[Guest Guest]

Thanks again Edgar, I appreciate your reply. 

 

Yes, there is only one Chairperson, and although they have several minor responsibilities within the organization, they were hired to primarily serve as the Chairperson of the Board of Directors. They are not considered the presiding officer of the organization -- only the Board.

 

To clarify for further replies, the Chairperson is not offering opinions, but asking questions which could be interpreted as swaying the opinion of the members of the Board of Directors.

[Gary Novosielski]

The role of presiding officer is not appreciably different whether a member or not, except in the obvious case that non-members may not vote.

 

The chair could certainly answer questions, especially parliamentary inquiries, but also matters of fact concerning the organization which you say the chair has considerable knowledge about.

 

If it goes much beyond that, to the point of engaging in debate on a motion, then that's something different, and if members of the body don't approve, they should say something.  Non-members have no right to debate, except by suspension of the rules, and a point of order to that effect would be one way to do that.  A polite discussion outside of a meeting would be another.

 

Asking questions should normally be limited to getting the proper language of motions clearly stated, asking for what purpose members are seeking recognition, when not obvious, or other questions related to the parliamentary situation.  Ultimately it's up to the body that is meeting to decide how much leeway they wish to extend.

 

Although non-members have no right to attend the meeting, the duty of presiding officer would seem to create an obvious exception, since it is difficult to preside from a distance.

[Josh Martin]

Although non-members have no right to attend the meeting, the duty of presiding officer would seem to create an obvious exception, since it is difficult to preside from a distance.

 

A non-member presiding officer still has no right to attend a meeting. The body could order the non-member presiding officer removed from the room for any reason, although the assembly would then need to elect a Chairman Pro Tempore. If the presiding officer was a member, he could not be removed from the room except through disciplinary procedures.