Over Spending Approved Budget

[Guest Carolyn Barth]

Our Vice President over spent by $600 on a party that we had budgeted. Originally the party was budgeted for $1k more but she cut it back as being a ridiculous amount. She made the budget approval a very painful and arduous experience. She knew in advance she was going to be over spending but didn’t let anyone know. Now she has submitted receipts for $600 more than the amount approved by general membership. Our by-laws don’t have a way to address this and a contingency line item was removed. How do we handle this? I’m concerned she has already shown an abuse of power and approving this will allow her to continue doing this. Thank you!

[Josh Martin]

On 2/8/2023 at 11:23 AM, Guest Carolyn Barth said:

Our Vice President over spent by $600 on a party that we had budgeted. Originally the party was budgeted for $1k more but she cut it back as being a ridiculous amount. She made the budget approval a very painful and arduous experience. She knew in advance she was going to be over spending but didn’t let anyone know. Now she has submitted receipts for $600 more than the amount approved by general membership. Our by-laws don’t have a way to address this and a contingency line item was removed. How do we handle this? I’m concerned she has already shown an abuse of power and approving this will allow her to continue doing this. Thank you!

It is up to the organization to decide how it wishes to resolve this matter. To the extent that the officers are authorized only to spend budgeted funds, and the $600 in excess represents an unauthorized expense, which seems to be the implication (and I express no view on whether this interpretation of the society's rules is correct), the following options occur to me:

1.) Ratify the additional expense.

2.) Ratify the additional expense, but also take some form of disciplinary action against the Vice President, such as removal from office (or a lesser penalty).

3.) Refuse to ratify the additional expense and require the Vice President to repay the unauthorized funds.

4.) Refuse to ratify the additional expense and require the Vice President to repay the unauthorized funds, and also take some form of disciplinary action against the Vice President, such as removal from office (or a lesser penalty).

Edited February 8, 2023 at 05:59 PM by Josh Martin

[Atul Kapur]

I agree with @Josh Martin but note that it is unclear whether the VP submitting the receipts to justify expenditures of organization funds or is looking for reimbursement for funds she spent on her own. 

If the former, then Mr. Martin's advice to "require the Vice President to repay the unauthorized funds" applies. 
If the latter, then the organization should just reimburse her up to the authorized amount.

[Guest Diana]

Hi Josh,

I am trying to find the page number for information on amending a motion.  I know it's in Robert's Rules starting on pg. 130 but am trying to get a direct quote and page number wherein the rules state that anyone can make an amendment to the main motion.  Can you point me in the right direction?

[Gary Novosielski]

What edition of "Robert's Rules"  are you referring to?

In the current (12th) edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, citations are not given by page number but by section (and paragraph).

The motion to Amend is found in §12.

I don't think you will find language that says anyone (well, any member) can make an amendment to the main motion, because that's the rule for every motion everywhere, except when specifically noted otherwise.  Making motions is a fundamental right of membership in a society.  All the rules regarding amendments, for example, apply to all members equally.

Is someone in your group trying to make the claim that certain members are not authorized to offer amendments?  Ask them what page that's on.

 

Edited February 9, 2023 at 11:42 PM by Gary Novosielski

[Gary Novosielski]

 

 

[Dan Honemann]

On 2/9/2023 at 6:43 PM, Gary Novosielski said:

 

 

I think so too.  

[Gary Novosielski]

On 2/9/2023 at 7:08 PM, Dan Honemann said:

I think so too.  

I did post that without fear of contradiction.

 

[Atul Kapur]

RONR (12th ed.) 1:4 (emphasis added)

"A member of an assembly . . . is a person entitled to full participation in its proceedings, that is . . . the right to attend meetings, to make motions, to speak in debate, and to vote. No member can be individually deprived of these basic rights 
of membership—or of any basic rights concomitant to them, 
such as the right to make nominations or to give previous no-
tice of a motion—except through disciplinary proceedings."