Improper Handling/Accusations

[Guest NES]

Hello,

This is a question mostly about a situation that I think was improperly handled.

When I first joined the board I am currently on, I had issues with another board member at the time, due to a situation that I feel was improperly handled.

At one of the first meetings I was at as a newly elected board member, this person told the other board members, at a meeting, that because I was married, I was surely sharing privileged information with my husband, who was a former board member, and that she thought that was grounds for a recall of me as a board member.

There was a former accusation towards me, made by the same person who implied there was a whole list of things I had done that were morally questionable, and when asked to provide evidence at the time, by two other board members, responded that she didn’t have to. The result of the supposed wrongs she was citing was to disband a committee I was on.

There was another accusation made at a meeting with a vendor, where she yelled at me in front of the vendor, his family member, and two other board members, and even threatened to expose me with evidence that didn’t exist. I later asked her for the evidence, and her response was to tell me to stop emailing her. 

Is it ok for such accusations, and suggestions for actions to be made, without a formal complaint filed,, in order to move to a trial type situation?

There was no formal complaints filed, in any of these situations, and no evidence for the claims ever presented, but it set the stage for many interactions that resulted in my silence due to the intimidation tactics used by the person who made tha initial accusation.

i am hoping the board understands that if such a complaint is ever made, that it be handled correctly through the proper procedure, and not allowed to be made so casually, especially not when action based on such accusations is the result.

Thank you for any help.

[Chris Harrison]

It sounds like there is plenty of reason for her to get disciplined for her unprofessional behavior.  Do you have  any allies who could intercede for you and get her to cut it out (I suspect you talking to her wouldn't help any)?  If people aren't successful in getting her to stop you may have to look into your options regarding removing her from the Board.. 

[Guest NES]

She has refused to talk to me, unless in a meeting, and the other board members have been told (incorrectly) that it is illegal for any of us to talk to each other outside of a meeting,  though I do suspect that she talks to them outside of meetings and excludes me from those conversations.

I unfortunately do not have any allies on the board.  We are about to get two new board members and I fear that she will somehow reach out to them and have them either in fear of her, or “in her pocket” in no time.

[Josh Martin]

3 hours ago, Guest NES said:

Is it ok for such accusations, and suggestions for actions to be made, without a formal complaint filed,, in order to move to a trial type situation?

No.

Additionally, based on this thread and the many other threads you have posted, it appears that your board has numerous serious issues and is likely in the need of a professional (I would suggest one or more of a parliamentarian, a lawyer, and/or a mediator) to discuss these issues in more detail. We will do the best we can, but I am doubtful that we will able to fully resolve all of these issues.

2 hours ago, Guest NES said:

I unfortunately do not have any allies on the board.  We are about to get two new board members and I fear that she will somehow reach out to them and have them either in fear of her, or “in her pocket” in no time.

Then you will need to appeal to a higher authority (the general membership).

[BabbsJohnson]

 The general membership in this case is 332 homeowners that are mostly non-responsive to general questions put out to them.

I also fear that raising these questions would cause some kind of retaliation from the board member in question.

Every time I have spoken up in the past, it has cost me something.

 I’m starting to think that there is little hope for this situation.

 

btw I am NES

I forgot I had an account before I posted.

Edited February 27, 2019 at 03:40 PM by Nosey

[Josh Martin]

2 hours ago, Nosey said:

The general membership in this case is 332 homeowners that are mostly non-responsive to general questions put out to them.

I also fear that raising these questions would cause some kind of retaliation from the board member in question.

Every time I have spoken up in the past, it has cost me something.

 I’m starting to think that there is little hope for this situation.

If no one in either the board or the membership wishes to adress this situation, then there certainly will not be a parliamentary solution, as any parliamentary solution will require the support of at least a majority (and preferably 2/3) of the assembly. You could consult an attorney to see if there is any legal recourse.

[Drake Savory]

For starters buy a copy of the current Robert's Rules of Order and take it to your meetings so you can show cites.

Second, when she starts making accusations rise and ask that the member be Called to Order.  Depending on what support you get from the Chair this may determine your next actions.

[BabbsJohnson]

The problem is this:

The person I have a problem with is the association president, who acts as chair.

The other board members don’t know what a point of order is, or how to handle it, and neither does she. 

 

[Chris Harrison]

Have you tried checking into whether there is some law governing HOAs?  Maybe there is someone you can talk to who can give you some options external to the HOA to deal with the issue. 

[BabbsJohnson]

Our by-laws specify RONR for all our corporate processes. This board has always been sloppy about using RR at all, never mind properly.

We are in CA so there are laws that govern HOAs but they do not dip into how meetings are run, only how people are notified, and what open session vs executive session is as far as public vs secret, and laws concerning who can be a board member and laws re: HOA vs homeowner responsibility for maintence, etc.

[Guest Who's Coming to Dinner]

Your problem is political, not parliamentary. My opinion is that the way forward is to lobby the association members to elect a new president.

[Drake Savory]

7 hours ago, Nosey said:

The problem is this:

The person I have a problem with is the association president, who acts as chair.

The other board members don’t know what a point of order is, or how to handle it, and neither does she. 

 

So you explain it to them with your copy of RONR handy. Although a Point of Order is not debatable you are allowed by the Chair to explain youself.   Keep it simple

A Point of Order is when a member believe the rules are violated.  Cite the rule in RONR.  Explain how it was violated.

If the Chair rules the Point not well taken then Appeal the decision of the Chair.

[BabbsJohnson]

In that case, is that when the other board members decide if the call by the president was good or not?

Does she get a say in that second tier decision?

[Josh Martin]

19 minutes ago, Nosey said:

In that case, is that when the other board members decide if the call by the president was good or not?

I would say “correct” rather than “good,” but yes.

20 minutes ago, Nosey said:

Does she get a say in that second tier decision?

Yes.

[BabbsJohnson]

And if I can demonstrate why it was out of order, do I get to explain that, and when? Is it when I first call Point of Order?

 

Also: I have an example of what happened at the last meeting that I wanted to call Point of Order for, but felt I could not because I didn’t know how to handle it, also, I’d like to know if you would consider this a personal attack:

 There was an implication that I had influenced the vendors in such a way that they approved my recommendation because they could not say no to me but there is also another implication that them approving my request was not a professional recommendation even though the vendor has stated that when they approve a request for a client it is a professional recommendation. The implication made was that they were just humoring me and their approval of my request it didn’t actually mean anything.

There is also a vague accusation that I was acting in my own interest rather than the community’s,  because I recommended as my post required at that time, some trees for planting.

I’ve also been accused several times in the past I was “acting like an expert”,  because I brought or talked about detailed information about tree stuff, and this time was another time that that was made as well.  What is meant by that has not been defined.

No evidence for any of the claims or accusations was presented, only vague accusations and implications,  and the results of those implications was that the other board members believed that the vendor didn’t take my recommendation seriously, and that basically they were just humoring me, and that my recommendations meant nothing in the professional sense.

 

[Drake Savory]

That is not a Point of Order issue.

Personal attacks are a breach of decorum and so you would ask the Chair to call the member to order or you can do it yourself under certain conditions.  RONR discusses how it would escalate if the member refuses to come to order.

[BabbsJohnson]

 So the point of order is not called if a personal attack is underway?

[Richard Brown]

1 hour ago, Nosey said:

 So the point of order is not called if a personal attack is underway?

A personal attack is a breach of decorum and subject to a point of order.  Here is an excerpt from pages 253-254 of RONR:

When a member notices a breach of order that may do harm if allowed to pass, he rises and, without waiting for recognition, immediately addresses the chair as follows:
MEMBER A: I rise to a point of order. [Or, "Point of order!"]
Anyone who is speaking takes his seat. If the point relates to a transgression of the rules of debate, the form used may be:
MEMBER A: Mr. President, I call the gentleman to order.
The chair then asks the member to state his point of order, or what words in the debate he objects to.
MEMBER A: I make the point of order that ...
On completing his statement, the member resumes his seat. The chair then rules whether "the point of order is well taken" or "is not well taken," stating briefly his reasons, which should be recorded in the minutes. If the chair desires, he can review the parliamentary situation without leaving the chair, but standing, before giving his ruling.
If the chair's decision requires any action and no appeal is made, he sees that the necessary action is taken before proceeding with the pending business. Thus, if the point of order relates to a breach of decorum in debate that is not serious, the chair can allow the member to continue his speech. But if the member's remarks are decided to be improper and [page 254] anyone objects, the member cannot continue speaking without a vote of the assembly to that effect (see pp. 645–46)

Nosey, you REALLY need your own copy of RONR. Many.... most??.... of the questions you are asking are explained very thoroughly in RONR.

[Josh Martin]

2 hours ago, Nosey said:

And if I can demonstrate why it was out of order, do I get to explain that, and when? Is it when I first call Point of Order?

When the member rises to a Point of Order, the chair asks the member to state their point, and the member then explains the alleged violation and why they believe it to be out of order. The chair rules this point with “well taken,” meaning the chair agrees, or “not well taken,” meaning the chair disagrees, and provides the chair’s reasoning for this ruling. A member may then appeal from the decision of the chair, which (if seconded) places the decision in the hands of the assembly. The chair speaks first and last in debate on the appeal, and other members may speak once. Finally, a vote is taken on whether to sustain the decision of the chair. A majority vote in the negative is required to overturn the chair’s ruling. See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 247-260 for more information. Since I understand from other threads that the main problem is with the chair, I also suggest reviewing RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 650-653.

2 hours ago, Nosey said:

Also: I have an example of what happened at the last meeting that I wanted to call Point of Order for, but felt I could not because I didn’t know how to handle it, also, I’d like to know if you would consider this a personal attack:

I would consider it a violation of the rules of decorum in RONR, on the grounds that it makes allusion to to the motives of members and makes accusations regarding the member’s character.

1 hour ago, Drake Savory said:

That is not a Point of Order issue.

Personal attacks are a breach of decorum and so you would ask the Chair to call the member to order or you can do it yourself under certain conditions.  RONR discusses how it would escalate if the member refuses to come to order.

A breach of decorum is a violation of the rules of order and is addressed by a Point of Order. It is correct that such a Point of Order is properly introduced by saying “I call the gentleman to order” instead of “I rise to a Point of Order,” but it is still a Point of Order. (Additionally, I would not quibble over this wording.)

Edited February 28, 2019 at 11:48 PM by Josh Martin

[BabbsJohnson]

I just had a conversation with the President. It did not go well.

I guess I’m quitting the board. I don’t feel I have a choice now.

Edited March 1, 2019 at 03:19 AM by Nosey

[Gary Novosielski]

7 hours ago, Nosey said:

 So the point of order is not called if a personal attack is underway?

Calling a member to order is a kind of point of order.

[Drake Savory]

Sorry for the misinformation then.  I thought Point of Order and Call to Order were separate.

Shows what happens when my copy of RONR is at home.

[BabbsJohnson]

On 2/28/2019 at 12:33 PM, Josh Martin said:

 

Yes.

Re: Appeal

Does this mean all members of the assembly get to vote on the appeal? 

 

[jstackpo]

Well, all the ones who are at the meeting anyway.

(We parliamentarians are annoyingly pedantic sticklers for precise language.  Sorry!)

[BabbsJohnson]

Yes, that is what I meant

 

its ok, so am I, once I know what terms are precise