The timing of the organizational meeting

[Guest Chris]

I have an immediate question, the answer to which will have some real-world consequences.

A local political party has bylaws with the following provisions: there will be an organizational meeting every four years after the political primary at which new ward committeemen are elected; only elected committeemen may serve as officers, a chairman of the organization serves until his or her successor is elected by the committeemen, and Robert's Rules are to be followed in cases where the bylaws are silent.

The bylaws are silent on when the organization meeting must occur, although traditionally they happen now, this week.

The primary was a month ago. The current chairman did not get enough signatures to get on the ballot and was not re-elected. He has filed a lawsuit over the signature requirements, which is likely to take some time to resolve. As he is still chairman, though, he has the power to set the timing of the organizational meeting, and he has scheduled it far out into the future in hopes that he'll get a favorable ruling from the court and can get re-elected.

Meanwhile, a group of committeemen is livid about this stunt. There is no provision in the bylaws allowing the rank and file to call an organizational meeting. Special meetings, yes, but as the committee is not yet organized this wouldn't be a special meeting.

Question: is there anything in Robert's Rules that could be used to force an organizational meeting sooner, so that we might elect a different chairman?

 

[Atul Kapur]

RONR (12th ed.) has the following [emphasis added].

 However, it sounds likely that lawyers will be involved for this, as well.

"50:21 Committee Meetings. When a committee has been appointed, its chairman (or first-named member temporarily acting—see 13:18) should call it together.6 If some members of the committee believe that the chairman has failed to call this initial meeting or any subsequent meeting when necessary, a meeting of the committee may be called by any two of its members, unless (such as for very large committees) the assembly’s rules or instructions prescribe, or empower the committee itself to require, a larger number. It is the responsibility of the person or persons calling a committee meeting to ensure that reasonable notice of its time and place is sent to every committee member.

[Josh Martin]

On 4/14/2024 at 6:34 PM, Guest Chris said:

Meanwhile, a group of committeemen is livid about this stunt. There is no provision in the bylaws allowing the rank and file to call an organizational meeting. Special meetings, yes, but as the committee is not yet organized this wouldn't be a special meeting.

Question: is there anything in Robert's Rules that could be used to force an organizational meeting sooner, so that we might elect a different chairman?

No. A meeting may only be called in the manner provided for in the bylaws.

I'm unclear, however, as to your statement that "as the committee is not yet organized this wouldn't be a special meeting." Could you elaborate on that?

Additionally, exact quotes regarding what your bylaws say about the terms of office for the "committee's" members and regarding calling special meetings may be of assistance. You say the chairman serves until a successor is elected - is the same true for other members of the committee?

Generally, I don't see anything preventing a special meeting being called in the manner provided in the bylaws, based on the facts provided so far.

On 4/14/2024 at 7:58 PM, Atul Kapur said:

RONR (12th ed.) has the following [emphasis added].

 However, it sounds likely that lawyers will be involved for this, as well.

"50:21 Committee Meetings. When a committee has been appointed, its chairman (or first-named member temporarily acting—see 13:18) should call it together.6 If some members of the committee believe that the chairman has failed to call this initial meeting or any subsequent meeting when necessary, a meeting of the committee may be called by any two of its members, unless (such as for very large committees) the assembly’s rules or instructions prescribe, or empower the committee itself to require, a larger number. It is the responsibility of the person or persons calling a committee meeting to ensure that reasonable notice of its time and place is sent to every committee member.

I am not certain that 50:21 is applicable in this matter, as I am not certain the "committee" the OP refers to is, in fact, a "committee" in the sense that term is used in RONR or the common parliamentary law. In my experience, the term "committee" as used in a political party sometimes refers to a body which is more in the nature of a Board of Directors. (While political parties also do have normal committees, from the facts presented, the board-type "committee" seems to be the situation here.)

Edited April 15, 2024 at 02:35 PM by Josh Martin

[Atul Kapur]

On 4/15/2024 at 10:29 AM, Josh Martin said:

I am not certain that 50:21 is applicable in this matter

The request was for "anything in Robert's Rules that could be used." The quotation was offered in response, without warranty, explicit or implied. 😄

That was one of the reasons I mentioned that a lawyer would likely be involved.

[Guest Chris]

Quote

I'm unclear, however, as to your statement that "as the committee is not yet organized this wouldn't be a special meeting." Could you elaborate on that?

This is a claim made by the unfortunate chairman. In a sense, he may be right: a committee does not exist until it is organized, and it can't conduct business until it is.  A special meeting may be one of those things it can't do, because the organizational meeting is a prerequisite.

Quote

Additionally, exact quotes regarding what your bylaws say about the terms of office for the "committee's" members and regarding calling special meetings may be of assistance. You say the chairman serves until a successor is elected - is the same true for other members of the committee?

Here's the quote:

The City Chairman and Secretary, once elected, shall serve for four years and until their successors are duly elected and qualified in accordance with the provisions of the ______ Election Code. Said officers shall be elected at the organizational meeting.

Other members of the committee are elected at the primary. There are no holdovers for regular members, if that's what you're asking.

Quote

In my experience, the term "committee" as used in a political party sometimes refers to a body which is more in the nature of a Board of Directors.

It's a body of people who are elected to represent their wards. I'm not sure if this is more like a Board of Directors or just a regular membership. The bylaws explicitly say that RONR is to be followed in committee proceedings. Does it matter for the purpose of interpreting 50:21?

 

 

[Josh Martin]

On 4/15/2024 at 11:08 AM, Guest Chris said:

This is a claim made by the unfortunate chairman. In a sense, he may be right: a committee does not exist until it is organized, and it can't conduct business until it is. 

I still do not understand the basis for this statement.

As I understand the facts, this committee has been in existence for some time, it just has a bunch of new members. So unless there are other rules on this matter in the organization's rules, I do not agree with the statement that "a committee does not exist until it is organized, and it can't conduct business until it is." This is also simply not internally consistent with the way you have been describing this, as it certainly sounds like the committee has members. And I don't see how a committee that doesn't exist can have members.

On 4/15/2024 at 11:08 AM, Guest Chris said:

The City Chairman and Secretary, once elected, shall serve for four years and until their successors are duly elected and qualified in accordance with the provisions of the ______ Election Code. Said officers shall be elected at the organizational meeting.

Other members of the committee are elected at the primary. There are no holdovers for regular members, if that's what you're asking.

Okay, but these newly elected persons are already members of the committee, right? If so, I still don't see what prevents the committee from calling a special meeting.

Maybe your organization has some strange rules, but ordinarily, a standing board, committee, or other assembly has continuing existence. Certainly, there are periodic changes in membership and a need to elect new officers, but this fact does not cause the board, committee, or other assembly to cease to exist.

I certainly grant that it's unusual to call a special meeting prior to the organizational meeting, but I don't see anything preventing it. There is certainly nothing in RONR which provides that this can't be done.

On 4/15/2024 at 11:08 AM, Guest Chris said:

I'm not sure if this is more like a Board of Directors or just a regular membership.

I don't think it matters, because either way, it doesn't sound like a "committee" in the sense that term is used in RONR.

On 4/15/2024 at 11:08 AM, Guest Chris said:

The bylaws explicitly say that RONR is to be followed in committee proceedings. Does it matter for the purpose of interpreting 50:21?

The question for purposes of interpreting whether 50:21 is applicable in this matter is whether this is a "committee" in the parliamentary sense. From the facts presented, I do not think that it is. As you say, it seems to be more in the nature of a board, or perhaps even the full membership of the organization.

"A committee, as understood in parliamentary law, is a body of one or more persons, elected or appointed by (or by direction of) an assembly or society, to consider, investigate, or take action on certain matters or subjects, or to do all of these things." RONR (12th ed.) 50:1

Even to the extent this was a committee, since my understanding is that the organization has its own rules on calling meetings, it seems to me those rules would take precedence over 50:21, since RONR generally provides that the organization's rules take precedence, and this rule in particular specifically refers to the possibility that the organization will have its own rules on this matter.

So I continue to think that, as a parliamentary matter, the answer to your problem is to simply call a special meeting under the procedures provided for in your rules. I do not agree with this argument that the committee ceases to exist in between the primary and the organizational meeting, nor do I agree with the premise that the committee is prohibited from holding special meetings during that period.

Of course, since the organization is already being sued by its current chairman, and I imagine the current chairman will not react favorably to this action, I think Dr. Kapur is certainly correct that the organization should seek legal counsel in this matter.

Edited April 15, 2024 at 09:02 PM by Josh Martin