Resignation question

[Josh Martin]

2 hours ago, Quest said:

Should I write him a letter stating the fact that I did withdraw my request to be relieved of duty before the next assembly therefore I a still a member citing RONR and Fact 18 along with a statement that the 3 remaining members are no longer a quorum so the decision is his? He is not familiar with Roberts Rules but has agreed we should apply them going forward.

I agree with all of this except this part about “the decision is his.” I don’t know where you get this idea. As previously noted, the board has seven members at this time, and it will be the board’s decision on whether to accept the resignations of the three other board members who have submitted resignations which have not yet been accepted (unless some of them also withdraw their resignations).

Since your resignation has already been withdrawn, there is nothing left to make a decision on in your case. As previously noted, before the question has been stated to the assembly on accepting the resignation, the member may withdraw his resignation unilaterally, and you did this.

Edited March 10, 2019 at 12:09 AM by Josh Martin

[Quest]

1 hour ago, Josh Martin said:

I agree with all of this except this part about “the decision is his.” I don’t know where you get this idea. As previously noted, the board has seven members at this time, and it will be the board’s decision on whether to accept the resignations of the three other board members who have submitted resignations which have not yet been accepted (unless some of them also withdraw their resignations).

Since your resignation has already been withdrawn, there is nothing left to make a decision on in your case. As previously noted, before the question has been stated to the assembly on accepting the resignation, the member may withdraw his resignation unilaterally, and you did this.

What I mean is the decision is his to accept these facts and take charge or block it. 

Edited March 10, 2019 at 01:25 AM by Quest

[Gary Novosielski]

 

8 hours ago, Quest said:

along with a statement that the 3 remaining members are no longer a quorum so the decision is his?

Wait, what?   The decision is not his.  If there is no quorum there are no decisions by the board.  That doesn't mean the president gets royal powers.  It means you need to establish a quorum by filling those vacancies.  I'm assuming that you are counting yourself among the 3 remaining members.

And it wouldn't be his "decision" anyway.  Don't be so eager to offer powers to people who don't have them, or they might try to exercise them.  Your position is that you withdrew your resignation before it was accepted, and you have a letter to verify that.

Therefore, it is not his decision, it is your decision, and you have already made it.

[Josh Martin]

13 hours ago, Quest said:

What I mean is the decision is his to accept these facts and take charge or block it. 

Okay. Hopefully that is more clear in the letter.

It would probably also help your case if you stop referring to these people as the “three remaining board members.” As I have previously noted, there are seven remaining board members.

8 hours ago, Gary Novosielski said:

Wait, what?   The decision is not his.  If there is no quorum there are no decisions by the board.  That doesn't mean the president gets royal powers.  It means you need to establish a quorum by filling those vacancies.  I'm assuming that you are counting yourself among the 3 remaining members.

No, he isn’t. There are actually seven remaining members, and the three referred to here are those who have not, at any time, submitted resignations. They are under the impression that they are the three remaining board members.

Four board members have submitted resignations (including the OP), but the resignations have not yet been accepted. The OS has withdrawn his resignation. Two more may intend to withdraw their resignations, and the last one still wishes to resign.

Edited March 10, 2019 at 02:44 PM by Josh Martin

[Quest]

The president canceled the meeting finally acknowledging that without us there is no quorum. so I am mailing the letter and I was very careful Mr. Martin to avoid the wording you pointed out are inaccurate and implemented the statement that it is the President's responsibility to verify the information I presented and to inform the board so we can just move forward. I am sending the letter certified.

[Gary Novosielski]

4 hours ago, Quest said:

The president canceled the meeting finally acknowledging that without us there is no quorum. so I am mailing the letter and I was very careful Mr. Martin to avoid the wording you pointed out are inaccurate and implemented the statement that it is the President's responsibility to verify the information I presented and to inform the board so we can just move forward. I am sending the letter certified.

Under what rule does the president have the right to cancel the meeting?  Do the bylaws give him that power?  RONR does not.

And why do you insist that the president has any authority to verify anything, which gives him the option not to?  The president has no role in this process whatsoever.  If you believe the board must be informed that you have withdrawn your resignation, then inform them yourself.   

 

[Richard Brown]

13 hours ago, Quest said:

The president canceled the meeting finally acknowledging that without us there is no quorum

 

8 hours ago, Gary Novosielski said:

Under what rule does the president have the right to cancel the meeting?  Do the bylaws give him that power?  RONR does not.

Mr. Novosielski is quite correct that the president has no authority to cancel a meeting unless your bylaws give him  that authority.  If enough members to constitute a quorum show up anyway, they can go ahead and have the meeting despite the president's attempted cancellation.  However, as a practical matter, this sort of  "cancellation" happens fairly often when it becomes obvious there will not be a quorum or when the reason for a special meeting no longer exists.  Severe weather is often the reason for those types of "cancellations".  The other members just willingly go along with the so-called cancellation and the meeting never happens.  The risk is that enough members to constitute a quorum will show up and have the meeting anyway.  Keep that in mind for future attempted "cancellations".  

 

[Josh Martin]

4 minutes ago, Richard Brown said:

 

Mr. Novosielski is quite correct that the president has no authority to cancel a meeting unless your bylaws give him  that authority.  If enough members to constitute a quorum show up anyway, they can go ahead and have the meeting despite the president's attempted cancellation.  However, as a practical matter, this sort of  "cancellation" happens fairly often when it becomes obvious there will not be a quorum or when the reason for a special meeting no longer exists.  Severe weather is often the reason for those types of "cancellations".  The other members just willingly go along with the so-called cancellation and the meeting never happens.  The risk is that enough members to constitute a quorum will show up and have the meeting anyway.  Keep that in mind for future attempted "cancellations".  

 

In addition to this, it seems possible that there may have been additional problems with this meeting. Since there is apparently some confusion regarding who is a member of the board, it may be that not all members of the board were notified of the meeting.