Responsibilty of Committee Trustee to Assembly

[Guest Todd J Boland]

Our Assembly has  3 trustees who represent the membership to a committee. The committee also has 3 non- members as part of the committee. Our assembly voted unanimously that the Assembley's trustees take a proposal to the committee that would make a change to our current policy. At the next monthly meeting, our assembly was informed by one of the 3 trustees that are "members" that he was going to vote how he wanted, regardless of what the membership voted. My question is; does Roberts Rules of Order have a section clarifying his responsibility to the membership, as a trustee for the membership to that committee? Our current bylaws do not address this. I'm hoping to get direction on how to address this.

[Richard Brown]

I'm afraid nothing in RONR  prevents the trustee from voting as he deems appropriate. However, if he is ignoring the will of the body which elected him, he might be subject to disciplinary action and or removal from Office, depending on the organization's bylaws and governing documents.

Edited to add: you might see FAQ # 20 regarding removal from office  http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#20

Edited May 30, 2018 at 02:44 AM by Richard Brown
Added last paragraph

[Guest Todd J Boland]

Thank you Richard.

[Joshua Katz]

On 5/29/2018 at 9:36 PM, Richard Brown said:

I'm afraid nothing in RONR  prevents the trustee from voting as he deems appropriate. However, if he is ignoring the will of the body which elected him, he might be subject to disciplinary action and or removal from Office, depending on the organization's bylaws and governing documents.

 Edited to add: you might see FAQ # 20 regarding removal from office  http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#20

I agree, except that this is nothing to fear.

[Chris Harrison]

On 5/29/2018 at 10:36 PM, Richard Brown said:

I'm afraid nothing in RONR  prevents the trustee from voting as he deems appropriate.

Was the presiding officer for the committee aware of the assembly's instructions? If so, I wonder if RONR p. 606 ll. 15-30 would have been applicable in this case and any future ones.  However, if the Committee has already met (it's a bit unclear if they have) the assembly's recourse is somewhat limited to using FAQ #20.

[Richard Brown]

13 hours ago, Chris Harrison said:

Was the presiding officer for the committee aware of the assembly's instructions? If so, I wonder if RONR p. 606 ll. 15-30 would have been applicable in this case and any future ones.  However, if the Committee has already met (it's a bit unclear if they have) the assembly's recourse is somewhat limited to using FAQ #20.

I think Mr. Harrison raises a valid point.  I also agree with his conclusion that if the committee has already met and voted on the issue, the assembly's recourse is probably limited to censure, removal from office, or perhaps  some other form of discipline.   I think we need more information to know if the provisions of lines 15-30 on page 606 regarding instructions to a delegate would be applicable to the situation here. I note also that the referenced section of RONR seems to be directed to conventions.  I'm not sure if that provision would apply to the situation described here by the original poster.  I  will leave it to others to speculate on that.

[Josh Martin]

58 minutes ago, Richard Brown said:

I think Mr. Harrison raises a valid point.  I also agree with his conclusion that if the committee has already met and voted on the issue, the assembly's recourse is probably limited to censure, removal from office, or perhaps  some other form of discipline.   I think we need more information to know if the provisions of lines 15-30 on page 606 regarding instructions to a delegate would be applicable to the situation here. I note also that the referenced section of RONR seems to be directed to conventions.  I'm not sure if that provision would apply to the situation described here by the original poster.  I  will leave it to others to speculate on that.

I do not think that the chairman of the committee is empowered to enforce the society’s instructions in the same manner as the chairman of a convention, for these reasons:

• The rule in question refers specifically to a convention.
• A convention is the highest body of the society’s parent organization and therefore has the authority to enforce such rules (or in this case, the chairman is empowered to enforce them on the convention’s behalf). It is not clear that the relationship between the society and the committee is of a similar nature, and therefore, it is not clear that the committee or its chairman has the authority to enforce such instructions on the society’s members.

There is certainly no doubt that the society is empowered to instruct persons who are appointed to represent the society on a committee, but I do not see any manner of enforcing these instructions other than disciplining those who fail to follow them.

I would note that since it appears the committee has not yet met, then I think it would be perfectly in order to replace this person prior to the committee meeting, if the society will meet in time to do so. The trustee in question has already indicated that he intends to disregard the society’s instructions.

Edited June 1, 2018 at 05:20 PM by Josh Martin