George Mervosh Posted January 20, 2016 at 03:09 PM Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 at 03:09 PM Please see my answer in this thread http://robertsrules.forumflash.com/index.php?/topic/27150-special-meetingexecutive-session/ It seems to me I might have part of it wrong. I opined the board members were required to maintain the secrecy of the executive session, and the others were honor bound to do so. In reading p. 96, ll. 6-9, it would seem to me that if the other members of the society have a right to attend board meetings according to the bylaws, they too have a requirement of secrecy and could be punished if they violate the requirement as well as board members. Is that correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 20, 2016 at 04:24 PM Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 at 04:24 PM 1 hour ago, George Mervosh said: Please see my answer in this thread http://robertsrules.forumflash.com/index.php?/topic/27150-special-meetingexecutive-session/ It seems to me I might have part of it wrong. I opined the board members were required to maintain the secrecy of the executive session, and the others were honor bound to do so. In reading p. 96, ll. 6-9, it would seem to me that if the other members of the society have a right to attend board meetings according to the bylaws, they too have a requirement of secrecy and could be punished if they violate the requirement as well as board members. Is that correct? Yes, I think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted January 21, 2016 at 11:32 PM Report Share Posted January 21, 2016 at 11:32 PM I would agree as well. Any assembly (not just the Board) which possesses the authority to sit confidentially gets its authority to do so from its establishing power. By choosing to sit secretly, the rule that the proceedings must be kept confidential is a duly-enacted decision of the assembly, and therefore all members subject to the organization's authority---even if not directly subject to that assembly's---are bound to follow that confidentiality. I see it as similar to, say, punishing a member for disrupting the proceedings of a committee. The member cannot escape punishment by arguing that he is not a member of the committee, and thus that he is free to disrupt it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted January 31, 2016 at 02:50 PM Report Share Posted January 31, 2016 at 02:50 PM On 1/21/2016 at 6:32 PM, Sean Hunt said: I would agree as well... Well put. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.