Official Meeting

[PWBROOKS]

We have eleven Board Members including the Chairman and Vice Chairman, actually how many would have to meet for it to be concidered an "Official Meeting".

[Robert B Fish]

We have eleven Board Members including the Chairman and Vice Chairman, actually how many would have to meet for it to be concidered an "Official Meeting".

Assuming your bylaws do not say otherwise, the quorum for a group of 11 persons would be a majority of the members, i.e. 6.

However, notice to all members is required. You can't have 6 "happen to meet" somewhere and conduct business.

-Bob

[hmtcastle]

We have eleven Board Members including the Chairman and Vice Chairman, actually how many would have to meet for it to be concidered an "Official Meeting".

There is no minimum number of members required to have an "official meeting" (well, maybe one member). But if you want to conduct any business at that meeting, you'll need a quorum.

[PWBROOKS]

Assuming your bylaws do not say otherwise, the quorum for a group of 11 persons would be a majority of the members, i.e. 6.

However, notice to all members is required. You can't have 6 "happen to meet" somewhere and conduct business.

-Bob

So if I understand right, 4 or 5 members can meet with say attorneys and discuss "official business" and that would NOT be considered a meeting? Thanks so much!!

[Gary Novosielski]

So if I understand right, 4 or 5 members can meet with say attorneys and discuss "official business" and that would NOT be considered a meeting? Thanks so much!!

Except that the "official business" they discuss would not be official business.

And if your group is subject to Sunshine Laws, one of those attorneys should be a defense attorney.

[PWBROOKS]

Not up on the Sunshine law but thanks so much for information, I was thinking that ANYTIME 2 members meet to discuss "buisness" it was considered a OFFICIAL MEETING.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

So if I understand right, 4 or 5 members can meet with say attorneys and discuss "official business" and that would NOT be considered a meeting?

You do not need a meeting to TALK.

So, if all they are doing is just TALKING, and not VOTING, then no rule is violated, as far as Robert's Rules of Order goes.

So, whether it was a meeting or wasn't a meeting, TALK is not prohibited in either case.

Q. Was any VOTING going on?

[David A Foulkes]

Not up on the Sunshine law but thanks so much for information, I was thinking that ANYTIME 2 members meet to discuss "buisness" it was considered a OFFICIAL MEETING.

I think a distinction that needs to be made here is the difference between "discussing business" and "conducting business". The latter is what takes place at a properly called meeting with a quorum present, where motions are made, debated, and voted upon. The former is certainly possible at any time, anywhere, with anyone, so long as no actionable decisions (I'll use that phrase for now) are made on behalf of the society as such.

So, two members walk into a bar. They order drinks, and discuss "business". No harm no foul. But nothing they discuss, nor decisions they arrive at, will necessitate the society to which they are members to act in any certain manner, or bring any obligation upon them, until such items are brought up at a duly called meeting and adopted by a proper voting threshold.

[Josh Martin]

Not up on the Sunshine law but thanks so much for information, I was thinking that ANYTIME 2 members meet to discuss "buisness" it was considered a OFFICIAL MEETING.

As far as RONR is concerned the entire board can meet over drinks and that doesn't necessarily make it an "official meeting." If the meeting was never properly called, it's not official and no business can be conducted.

But if you care this much whether something is called an "official meeting" I have a suspicion there is some sort of Sunshine Law or Open Meeting Law involved, and that's something you need to talk to a lawyer about.

[Rev Ed]

As for the meeting with the lawyer - those members may be empowered to meet with the lawyer on behalf of the group with the intention of reporting back to the group (in this case the Board) to provide any information required (presumably legal advise in this case.)