When required number of committeemen want to call special meeting, but chairman refuses.

[Catharine Littlefield]

Our Rules provide:

The County Executive Committee shall meet at the call of the chairman, any three committeemen, or by ten percent of the Committee’s membership, whichever is greater, at such time and place as he or they shall appoint, but no meeting shall be held without each member of the committee having been given at least twenty-four (24) hours written notice thereof. The County Executive Committee may also meet and act by telephone conference upon twenty-four (24) hours written notice. For the purposes of these rules, unless otherwise specified, “written notice” shall be defined as mail by the United States Postal Service, electronic mail, or private mail delivery service.

We have six committeemen who want to call a special meeting, but how to we properly do that? 

Just set time, place and purpose and notify all in writing?

If neither Chairman nor Vice Chairman attend, who runs meeting?

We can easily have quorum present (it is only 1/3 of voters).  What if we pass the motion we want, and they fail to recognize it?

PS.  The officers, having just learned that a motion will be proposed at the next meeting, have suddenly made the announcement that no motions will be allowed.  They are just "too busy."

Please help!

Background:

This is a small county Republican Party, that is run by a County Executive Committee comprised of one committeeman elected by each of 12 organized precincts.  It is "held together by a Chairman elected at convention."  The committeemen and the state committeewoman (representative of the County to the State Executive Committee, are the only ones with a vote unless there is a tie, in which case the Chair can vote. 

We are governed by three documents:

• SC Election Law
• SC GOP Rules
• Roberts Rules (for everything not covered in SC Rules, which is a lot.)

Counties may adopt bylaws that are not in conflict with State Rules.  Otherwise, State Rules govern.

This is the first time in over fifteen years that the precincts have been duly organized, even though it is a requirement in State Law that the State Party must organize on the precinct level.  (the story behind that is too long to tell)

To cut to the chase, the New Officers (mainly Chairman and Secretary) are substantially out of compliance with almost every rule of the party, and have never properly conducted meetings according to Roberts - especially in regard to motions and debate.)

In short... we are in the mess.  How can you follow the rules when the Chairman makes up his own at will.

 

[Rob Elsman]

Political parties usually have very muscular rules, and it may very well be that the party's rules will have the answer to the question.

Insofar as the rules in RONR (12th ed.) apply, any two members may call a meeting of a committee, and notice of the meeting must be sent to each member of the committee a reasonable time in advance.  If the chairman refuses to attend the properly called meeting, the members of the committee can elect a chairman pro tem to preside over the meeting. See RONR (12th ed.) 50:2.

Edited September 19, 2023 at 04:35 PM by Rob Elsman

[Catharine Littlefield]

Thank you!

The Rules of our State Party are very muscular, and like all organizations, those currently in power often cherry-pick to enforce the ones they prefer.  This goes with the territory.  What we are experiencing here is particularly egregious though.  I think those of us who are trying to rectify it one step at a time, realize that.

All in all we think our state rules and the party structure it supports are very good.  We could have bylaws, but do not.  So State Rules are controlling, and state rules specifically refer to RONR for topics not covered in state rules.

In this case, the state rule trumps Roberts Rules, and they have stiffened the requirement for calling a special meeting to three committeemen or 10% of membership.  We can easily meet that requirement.

What do we do if we have that meeting, form the Rules Committee we desire (directly to combat lack of following rules by Officers)? and then they do not recognize it, just ignore it?

 

Edited September 19, 2023 at 05:28 PM by Catharine Littlefield
left out something

[Atul Kapur]

If the Officers obstruct proper calls for meetings, try to prevent business from being properly introduced, and ignore properly adopted motions, then you may want to consider disciplinary measures. You may want to try to get the state party involved.

[Catharine Littlefield]

That is exactly the case, and although we are hoping to avoid that, if none of our other efforts succeed, we are simultaneously preparing an appeal to be heard by the State Committee.

Thanks so much for the quick responses!

[Gary Novosielski]

On 9/19/2023 at 1:23 PM, Catharine Littlefield said:

The Rules of our State Party are very muscular, and like all organizations, those currently in power often cherry-pick to enforce the ones they prefer. 

That, in my view, is an unsubstantiated extrapolation.

[Josh Martin]

On 9/19/2023 at 11:24 AM, Catharine Littlefield said:

We have six committeemen who want to call a special meeting, but how to we properly do that? 

Just set time, place and purpose and notify all in writing?

Is "six committeemen" at least 10% of the committee's membership? The rule provides that the meetings are called by "the chairman, any three committeemen, or by ten percent of the Committee’s membership, whichever is greater".

To the extent that six committeemen is at least 10% of the committee's membership, yes, it appears you would set the time, place, and send the notice to all persons in the manner specified in the rule.

Normally, organizations provide that a certain number of members may require a meeting to be called, but give the authority to the Chair or Secretary to actually call the meeting. Your rules, however, appear to permit the members to call the meeting directly, as the rule provides "The County Executive Committee shall meet at the call of the chairman, any three committeemen, or by ten percent of the Committee’s membership, whichever is greater, at such time and place as he or they shall appoint." It seems clear in context that "or they" refers to the committee members calling the meeting.

On 9/19/2023 at 11:24 AM, Catharine Littlefield said:

If neither Chairman nor Vice Chairman attend, who runs meeting?

The Secretary (or any member, if the Secretary is also absent) would call the meeting to order and preside over the election of a Chairman Pro Tempore, who would preside for the duration of the meeting.

On 9/19/2023 at 11:24 AM, Catharine Littlefield said:

We can easily have quorum present (it is only 1/3 of voters).  What if we pass the motion we want, and they fail to recognize it?

I understand that "they" in this sentence refers to the officers.

Generally, I think the answers would be some combination of the following:

• Adopt motions reiterating the orders in question, with more specificity, deadlines, and so forth.
• To the extent permissible within the organization's rules and practicality, assign other persons to carry out the assembly's orders.
• Pursue disciplinary procedures against the officers, up to and including removal from office, either for the purpose of pressuring the officers to comply with the assembly's orders or, in the alternative, replacing them with others.
  • This last one, of course, should not be undertaken without a thorough review of what your bylaws say concerning this subject, or if the bylaws are silent, what Ch. XX of RONR says on this subject.
• Legal action. (Outside the scope of RONR and this forum - consult an attorney.)

On 9/19/2023 at 11:24 AM, Catharine Littlefield said:

PS.  The officers, having just learned that a motion will be proposed at the next meeting, have suddenly made the announcement that no motions will be allowed.  They are just "too busy."

The officers have no authority to decree that no motions will be allowed.

On 9/19/2023 at 11:24 AM, Catharine Littlefield said:

How can you follow the rules when the Chairman makes up his own at will.

Get a new Chairman who will follow the rules?

[Catharine Littlefield]

You have sized things up rather well.  The problem is not what is correct - our officers have already violated many rules egregiously, but they, so far, are getting away with it.

I am mainly consulting here to make sure our group who are trying to combat this know what is correct as far as what we do.  High Road all around, and making sure we have exhausted every appropriate avenue we have.

Though we know we have extreme measures we could try, the fight itself would hurt the Party during an important campaign season.  We already have a plan B to establish a parallel "Republican Club"  willing to work with them, but believing we will bring more people into the party at a crucial time.  Their "We intend to run this Party like a Military Unit!" won't fly with most Republicans I know.  If that is their thing, so be it.  We will stay in their official group, doing what we can, but offering an alternative for those who can't stomach it until we have reorganization in 2025.  We can elect new leadership every two years, so we just have to keep folks together until then.

Thank you so much for taking the time to reply.  You have been a big help as well as an encouragement, actually.

Edited September 20, 2023 at 05:00 PM by Catharine Littlefield

[Catharine Littlefield]

On 9/19/2023 at 3:54 PM, Gary Novosielski said:

That, in my view, is an unsubstantiated extrapolation.

I actually agree with you... but that does not mean it is not true!