Two questions about executive session

[BabbsJohnson]

If a person is accused of something by another board member, or by a manager, or by an invited guest, during Executive Session, do they have the right to speak of it freely, since they were the one accused of some wrong?

Also: what if the accusation was untrue, and there was proof of this?

 

Also: if a person shares some personal detail about themselves in  some way during Executive Session, and it has nothing to do with board jurisdiction, (nor an authorized executive session topic, as far as local laws go), and someone else makes an indecourous comment about that person in response, (and it is not called out by the Chair, and the Chair, in fact, then joins in and makes several indecorous remarks about that person as well), is the person who the remarks were made about required to keep that exchange a secret, since it was in Executive Session?

 

 

Edited August 13, 2019 at 09:56 PM by .oOllXllOo.

[Chris Harrison]

29 minutes ago, .oOllXllOo. said:

If a person is accused of something by another board member, or by a manager, or by an invited guest, during Executive Session, do they have the right to speak of it freely, since they were the one accused of some wrong?

As far as RONR is concerned the duty to keep what was discussed in Executive Session within Executive Session isn't waived just because what was discussed involved that particular member.  That being said, if I discussed it outside of Executive Session and was called out on it I would argue that if I am being accused of something or my reputation is being impugned I darn well have a right to refute those allegations in any forum I darn well please.  Of course, they may then toss me out on my ear but such is life. 

 

Quote

also: if a person shares some personal detail about themselves in  some way during Executive Session, and it has nothing to do with board jurisdiction, (nor an authorized executive session topic, as far as local laws go), and someone else makes an indecourous comment about that person in response, (and it is not called out by the Chair, and the Chair, in fact, then joins in and makes several indecorous remarks about that person as well), is the person who the remarks were made about required to keep that exchange a secret, since it was in Executive Session?

Since you said this had "nothing to do with board jurisdiction, (nor an authorized executive session topic, as far as local laws go)" I would suggest you talk to a lawyer as to any legal implications but as for RONR see my above response.

[BabbsJohnson]

12 minutes ago, Chris Harrison said:

As far as RONR is concerned the duty to keep what was discussed in Executive Session within Executive Session isn't waived just because what was discussed involved that particular member.   

 

Since you said this had "nothing to do with board jurisdiction, (nor an authorized executive session topic, as far as local laws go)" I would suggest you talk to a lawyer as to any legal implications but as for RONR see my above response.

State laws, I have been told, override anything in RONR.

So for instance.,, if a state law says that a board is only authorized to discuss, let’s say, five specific and well-defined topics, and is otherwise violating the law if they discussed anything else, then if “anything else” was discussed, it would be in violation of the law, and as far as the State is concerned is not considered protected or confidential information,  since it does not fit within the confines of the specifically authorized topics.

 

But of course I agree about the legal vs parliamentary thing.

[Josh Martin]

16 hours ago, .oOllXllOo. said:

If a person is accused of something by another board member, or by a manager, or by an invited guest, during Executive Session, do they have the right to speak of it freely, since they were the one accused of some wrong?

No.

16 hours ago, .oOllXllOo. said:

Also: what if the accusation was untrue, and there was proof of this?

Still no.

16 hours ago, .oOllXllOo. said:

Also: if a person shares some personal detail about themselves in  some way during Executive Session, and it has nothing to do with board jurisdiction, (nor an authorized executive session topic, as far as local laws go), and someone else makes an indecourous comment about that person in response, (and it is not called out by the Chair, and the Chair, in fact, then joins in and makes several indecorous remarks about that person as well), is the person who the remarks were made about required to keep that exchange a secret, since it was in Executive Session?

Yes.

So far as RONR is concerned, if it happened in executive session, it needs to be kept secret, unless the body votes to lift secrecy. There are no exceptions.

15 hours ago, .oOllXllOo. said:

State laws, I have been told, override anything in RONR.

Yes, this is correct.

15 hours ago, .oOllXllOo. said:

So for instance.,, if a state law says that a board is only authorized to discuss, let’s say, five specific and well-defined topics, and is otherwise violating the law if they discussed anything else, then if “anything else” was discussed, it would be in violation of the law, and as far as the State is concerned is not considered protected or confidential information,  since it does not fit within the confines of the specifically authorized topics.

I don’t know. This is a legal question.

[BabbsJohnson]

1 hour ago, Josh Martin said:

No.

Still no.

Yes.

So far as RONR is concerned, if it happened in executive session, it needs to be kept secret, unless the body votes to lift secrecy. There are no exceptions.

Yes, this is correct.

I don’t know. This is a legal question.

That seems ridiculous.

if abuse of a person, or a tarnishing of their name happens in Executive, in my opinion, it should not have to be kept secret, 

if it was about someone else? That’s one thing...but if it was about themselves, and so it’s their own “information”... especially since it had already been discussed previously elsewhere...

Seems wrong.

Also, what if the use of RONR was discussed in Executive... a question of how to use point of order for instance...now it becomes a secret topic?

Nothing of it can be repeated?

That did happen, and the idea that now its top secret it ludicrous.

Edited August 14, 2019 at 02:44 PM by .oOllXllOo.

[Richard Brown]

13 minutes ago, .oOllXllOo. said:

That seems ridiculous.

if abuse of a person, or a tarnishing of their name happens in Executive, in my opinion, it should not have to be kept secret, 

From a legal standpoint, there might (or might not) be a legal remedy.  From a parliamentary procedure standpoint, it is improper to disclose what was said in an executive session.

We don't do legal here.

[BabbsJohnson]

4 minutes ago, Richard Brown said:

From a legal standpoint, there might (or might not) be a legal remedy.  From a parliamentary procedure standpoint, it is improper to disclose what was said in an executive session.

We don't do legal here.

I guess in the consideration that Executive Session is only being used for its intended purpose, the idea it all stays secret is no issue.

[Dan Honemann]

1 hour ago, .oOllXllOo. said:

I guess in the consideration that Executive Session is only being used for its intended purpose, the idea it all stays secret is no issue.

Huh?

[Josh Martin]

2 hours ago, .oOllXllOo. said:

if abuse of a person, or a tarnishing of their name happens in Executive, in my opinion, it should not have to be kept secret, 

if it was about someone else? That’s one thing...but if it was about themselves, and so it’s their own “information”... especially since it had already been discussed previously elsewhere...

Seems wrong.

Also, what if the use of RONR was discussed in Executive... a question of how to use point of order for instance...now it becomes a secret topic?

Nothing of it can be repeated?

That did happen, and the idea that now its top secret it ludicrous.

Well, let me clarify. The information itself, to the extent that does not relate to executive session, could be disclosed. If, during an executive session, a member shared a personal detail, and an exchange of indecorous comments followed, the member is by no means prohibited from disclosing that same personal detail to other persons. It is a detail concerning the member, and the detail existed long before the executive session occurred. The member is, however, prohibited from disclosing the fact that she shared this detail in executive session, or the exchange that followed, because those things happened solely within executive session.

Similarly, if there was a discussion regarding the proper use of a Point of Order, members are not prohibited from discussing the proper use of a Point of Order. They are, however, prohibited from noting that such a discussion occurred in executive session, or noting the specifics of that discussion.

Alternately, as I believe J.J. once put it, suppose that Mr. A said the sky was blue in executive session. This obviously does not mean that the color of the sky is now a secret. The fact that Mr. A said this at the meeting in question, however, is a secret.

This seems to at least address part of the concerns. The other concern appears to be that, if a board member takes an action during an executive session which should perhaps be subject to discipline, how can that member be disciplined if the action cannot be discussed? I would note that the board is a subordinate body, so the membership could order the board to lift secrecy regarding the meeting in question, at least for the prof sharing the information with the membership. It would be advisable for the membership itself to enter executive session before doing so, so that the information at least stays within the society.

29 minutes ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

Huh?

I believe the OP is referring to the fact that her organization is subject to laws which limit the topics which may be discussed in executive session.

Edited August 14, 2019 at 05:33 PM by Josh Martin