Finding of standing committees

[Guest Mike]

Good Morning,

I was wondering what the procedure is regarding issues that have been referred to a disciplinary review board within our organization. It would seem to me, at the very least, that the committee should have to notify the board of what matters they have been asked to address in committee. There is a clear division on the committee regarding a certain issue that some of the members wish to keep from the entire board. The committee was addressing an issue centered around a threatening E-mail circulated amongst some on the board. As a matter of prudence it seems logical that the nature of the hearing be disclosed to the board.

Thank You

[Chris Harrison]

I was wondering what the procedure is regarding issues that have been referred to a disciplinary review board within our organization. It would seem to me, at the very least, that the committee should have to notify the board of what matters they have been asked to address in committee. There is a clear division on the committee regarding a certain issue that some of the members wish to keep from the entire board. The committee was addressing an issue centered around a threatening E-mail circulated amongst some on the board. As a matter of prudence it seems logical that the nature of the hearing be disclosed to the board.

If the bylaws provide for a Disciplinary Review Board they should spell out the Review Board's authority and the process. Also, you refer to a Review Board, a Board, and a Committee so I am not sure if all of them are separate bodies or if you are using different terms meaning the same body.

[Guest Mike]

If the bylaws provide for a Disciplinary Review Board they should spell out the Review Board's authority and the process. Also, you refer to a Review Board, a Board, and a Committee so I am not sure if all of them are separate bodies or if you are using different terms meaning the same body.

Chris,

Sorry for the confusion. The DRC and the committee are one in the same in my post above. I will post for you the exact wording from our bylaws...

Article X – Committees

Committees – As events warrant committees can be formed. Committees can be standing or ad-hoc and can be formed to address specific issues as they arise. The formation of committees can be proposed by any voting member and then voted upon at the monthly meeting. Standing committee chair and members will be named during the first month of the BBA year (November).

Standing Committees will be comprised of the following:

• Discipline Review Committee (DRC)

• Rules Committee

• Tournament Committee

• Travel Teams Committee

In the absence of the language to the contrary, can it be requested that the activities of the DRC be reported to the entire board?

[hmtcastle]

I will post for you the exact wording from our bylaws...

Bylaws can only be properly interpreted in their entirety, something that's beyond the scope and purpose of this forum.

That said, anyone can request anything of anybody.

[Guest Mike]

To H. Wm. Mountcastle,

To simplify my question, is there any protection under Roberts Rules to keep the activities and/or findings of a standing committee a secret from the rest of the board. I understand you are not here to interpert our bylaws, however the section that I posted previously is the only mention of the roles and responsibilities of a committee in our organization.

Thank You

[Chris Harrison]

To simplify my question, is there any protection under Roberts Rules to keep the activities and/or findings of a standing committee a secret from the rest of the board.

No. RONR leaves the details of the interactions (or lack thereof) between bodies of the organization up to the organization.

[Bruce Lages]

One part of your bylaws that you will need to interpret is who is the parent body of the standing committees. That is who the committee reports to. If the disciplinary review committee is formed and populated by the general membership, the board is not involved in their work and report (unless there is another rule which addresses this specifically).

[Kim Goldsworthy]

... regarding a certain issue that some of the members wish to keep from the entire board.

The committee was addressing an issue centered around a threatening E-mail circulated amongst some on the board.

Q. Why is this data being held back?

That is, there are circumstances where a committee would hold back information.

Most of the time, there are no such circumstances.

Disciplinary committees are the exception to the general rule. Disciplinary committees are supposed to leak nothing.

For example, if the "threatening e-mail", once leaked, would lead to a law suit against the organization, then the "threatening e-mail" ought not be leaked.

It isn't up to the committee to risk the existence of the whole organization just because the committee cannot obey the rule of confidentiality which is supposed to exist in any disciplinary committee. - You don't leak out everything.

Why not? Because discipline is sensitive in nature, and slanderous/libelous material is supposed to be kept in strictest confidence, until the appropriate party orders otherwise.

That is why discipline is done by committee, and not done by the general membership. - You don't air out false dirty laundry, and you don't leak lies and innuendo and gossip.

So, why leak it? Or, as I put it, why withhold it?

[Gary c Tesser]

Umm. Not bad, Kim.

Guest _Mike_. Good morning. It might help you to know that RONR advises that "board or committee meetings are customarily held in executive session [top of p. 93]."

[Kim Goldsworthy]

It might help you to know that RONR advises that "board or committee meetings are customarily held in executive session [top of p. 93]."

Which calls attention to a subtle difference:

Do not confuse:

(a.) the act of holding meeting(s) in executive session.

(b.) the act of reporting out, well after all the executive sessions.

#a is not what the original poster was addressing, as far as I can tell.

#b, i.e., the passing along of information after the committee has met (perhaps an indefinite number of times), in a written report, is what I glean from the original posting.

Let's take a second look at what the original poster had said:

It would seem to me, at the very least, that the committee should have to notify the board [eventually? -kg] ...

... of what matters they have been asked to address in committee.

There is a clear division on the committee regarding a certain issue that some of the members [of the committee? -kg] wish to keep from the entire board.

... As a matter of prudence it seems logical that the nature of the hearing be disclosed to the board.

Thus, perhaps we should add that the board can go into executive session for the sole purpose of hearing the sensitive data which the committee report holds. - That would satisfy most constraints of secrecy, in my opinion. - From one executive session (viz., the committee) to another executive session (viz., the board).

Pass the data along with the CONTROL "Cone Of Silence", as Maxwell Smart, Agent #86, would insist upon.

[Gary c Tesser]

Kim, if you're suggesting that the board can stick its nose into the confidential deliberations of its committee simply by going into executive session itself, I vehemently disagree, emphasis on "vehemently" and "disagree."

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Kim, if you're suggesting that the board can stick its nose into the confidential deliberations of its committee simply by going into executive session itself, I vehemently disagree, emphasis on "vehemently" and "disagree."

Gary, I am suggesting that the committee reports to the board.

When and if the committee reports to the board, or when/if the board orders the committee to report (which is an option), the board ought to resolve itself into executive session for as long as that report is being given.

That finesses the whole enchilada.