How to cancel posted meeting

[Guest Anita V]

A meeting of BOD was properly posted. 2 hours before the meeting the Pres cancelled it. We are a non-profit corp. Can a properly posted meeting be cancelled via email?

[Chris Harrison]

A meeting of BOD was properly posted. 2 hours before the meeting the Pres cancelled it. We are a non-profit corp. Can a properly posted meeting be cancelled via email?

Nothing in RONR allows a properly called meeting to be canceled.

Edited to add:

Of course check your bylaws to make sure they don't grant the President this authority.

[George Mervosh]

If this happens again, assuming a quorum is present, conduct the meeting without him.

[Tim Wynn]

If this happens again, assuming a quorum is present, conduct the meeting without him.

See RONR(1Oth ed.), p. 436-437 for some rules for implementing Mr. Mervosh's advice.

[Rev Ed]

The Problem is that if enough members see the President's e-mail and believe him to be correct, then there will not be quorum present. You have to hope that enough people show up to ensure quorum.

While this might be technically legit according to RONR, even if that worked, watch out. Members who saw the President's e-mail and did not attend the meeting because of it may likely be offended and go back and re-open anything discussed at the "cancelled" meeting or worse.

I'd strongly suggest, if the President does not have the authority, to read up on Chapter XX if he/she ever does this again.

[Weldon Merritt]

The Problem is that if enough members see the President's e-mail and believe him to be correct, then there will not be quorum present. You have to hope that enough people show up to ensure quorum.

While this might be technically legit according to RONR, even if that worked, watch out. Members who saw the President's e-mail and did not attend the meeting because of it may likely be offended and go back and re-open anything discussed at the "cancelled" meeting or worse.

I'd strongly suggest, if the President does not have the authority, to read up on Chapter XX if he/she ever does this again.

Nothing would prevent members who know that the president does not have the authority from sending their own message to the rest of the members, saying that the meeting has not legitimately been canceleld, and that it will be held, with or without the president. Some members still may choose to believe the president and not attend, but at least they cannot claim they were not advised that the meeting would be held notwithstanding the improper cancellation notice. All of this asssumes, of course, that nothing in the organization's own rules gives the president the authority to cancel a meeting.

[Chris Harrison]

The Problem is that if enough members see the President's e-mail and believe him to be correct, then there will not be quorum present. You have to hope that enough people show up to ensure quorum.

While this might be technically legit according to RONR, even if that worked, watch out. Members who saw the President's e-mail and did not attend the meeting because of it may likely be offended and go back and re-open anything discussed at the "cancelled" meeting or worse.

That is quite true (I know I would be annoyed if I was told a meeting was canceled and the members went on anyway). However, a way to hopefully reduce the chances of that happening is to do one of two things (or both):

1) If you have access to the membership list (or the e-mail has everyone's names listed) is to e-mail the members (or reply all) and point out that the President has no authority to cancel the meeting (check all governing documents to verify that first) and that business can be validly conducted if a quorum shows up. That way people have been forewarned.

2) Contact the President and point out that no rule grants him or her the authority to cancel the meeting (nicely-or not asking for some cited rule to support the position if s/he still insists the authority exists) and to kindly let the members know the meeting is still on.

[Chris Harrison]

Nothing would prevent members who know that the president does not have the authority from sending their own message to the rest of the members, saying that the meeting has not legitimately been canceleld, and that it will be held, with or without the president. Some members still may choose to believe the president and not attend, but at least they cannot claim they were not advised that the meeting would be held notwithstanding the improper cancellation notice. All of this asssumes, of course, that nothing in the organization's own rules gives the president the authority to cancel a meeting.

Good point.

[Weldon Merritt]

Good point.

Great minds think alike!

[Rev Ed]

It's great to say that a member should send out another e-mail stating that the meeting will take place, but depending on the time frame, it may not be sufficient. For example, if the "cancellation e-mail" is sent out at 2 p.m. for a 7 p.m. meeting, and you do not see the e-mail until 4 p.m., then you have three hours prior to the meeting to try to get people to come out to the meeting. If some of those members do not see your e-mail until 5 or 6 p.m. it might be too late to get them to show up. It is not simple to say that the members can do something when the timeframe may not be of practical assistance.

[Tim Wynn]

It's great to say that a member should send out another e-mail stating that the meeting will take place, but depending on the time frame, it may not be sufficient. For example, if the "cancellation e-mail" is sent out at 2 p.m. for a 7 p.m. meeting, and you do not see the e-mail until 4 p.m., then you have three hours prior to the meeting to try to get people to come out to the meeting. If some of those members do not see your e-mail until 5 or 6 p.m. it might be too late to get them to show up. It is not simple to say that the members can do something when the timeframe may not be of practical assistance.

If the assembly wants to take your advice and adjourn a quorate meeting to a later time, that's its choice, but no rule in RONR says that it must.

[Josh Martin]

It's great to say that a member should send out another e-mail stating that the meeting will take place, but depending on the time frame, it may not be sufficient. For example, if the "cancellation e-mail" is sent out at 2 p.m. for a 7 p.m. meeting, and you do not see the e-mail until 4 p.m., then you have three hours prior to the meeting to try to get people to come out to the meeting. If some of those members do not see your e-mail until 5 or 6 p.m. it might be too late to get them to show up. It is not simple to say that the members can do something when the timeframe may not be of practical assistance.

If the cancellation e-mail is not sent out until five hours before the meeting I suspect many people will show up regardless of what happens afterward.

[hmtcastle]

If the cancellation e-mail is not sent out until five hours before the meeting I suspect many people will show up regardless of what happens afterward.

And even if the president fools the members this time, I suspect they won't get fooled again.

[David A Foulkes]

It's a certainty (at least, I suspect, considering the time of original post, and the 2-hour window) that this is all in the past. That said, I think the best plan for the future, or anyone else found in this situation, would be to contact as many like-minded members to meet at the appointed time and hope, with enough support, and possibly electing a like-minded chair pro tem to preside, that an adjourned meeting can be set up. Then, get the word out again, and in the meantime get a copy of RONR and smack the President upside and downside with it until he acknowledges his boneheadedness and behaves.

My two cents.

[Weldon Merritt]

It's a certainty (at least, I suspect, considering the time of original post, and the 2-hour window) that this is all in the past. That said, I think the best plan for the future, or anyone else found in this situation, would be to contact as many like-minded members to meet at the appointed time and hope, with enough support, and possibly electing a like-minded chair pro tem to preside, that an adjourned meeting can be set up. Then, get the word out again, and in the meantime get a copy of RONR and smack the President upside and downside with it until he acknowledges his boneheadedness and behaves.

My two cents.

Since even an inquorate meeting can Fix the Time to Which to Adjourn, it woudln't take many like-minded members to meet and do that. So depending upon the time frame and how many actually show up, the meeting could be held as scheduled, or an adjourned meeting could be set.

[David A Foulkes]

Since even an inquorate meeting can Fix the Time to Which to Adjourn, it woudln't take many like-minded members to meet and do that. So depending upon the time frame and how many actually show up, the meeting could be held as scheduled, or an adjourned meeting could be set.

Certainly true. My thinking was that if enough show up to make a quorum, even though the meeting could continue, some/many members may have not attended thinking it had been (improperly) "canceled." Having enough "like-minded" members who felt the meeting should be properly Fixed to Adjourn, allowing the absentees the opportunity to attend at a later date (and giving them notice so they'd know), might help prevent an unscrupulous and powerful minority from holding the meeting in the absence of the absentees.

[Weldon Merritt]

Certainly true. My thinking was that if enough show up to make a quorum, even though the meeting could continue, some/many members may have not attended thinking it had been (improperly) "canceled." Having enough "like-minded" members who felt the meeting should be properly Fixed to Adjourn, allowing the absentees the opportunity to attend at a later date (and giving them notice so they'd know), might help prevent an unscrupulous and powerful minority from holding the meeting in the absence of the absentees.

I agree that ideally, your plan probably would be the best. The only problem is that if the "unscrupulous and powerful minority" happen to be in the majority at the supposedly cancelled meeting, at which a quorum neverthless was present, they could defeat FTTWTA, and then go ahead adopt whatever they wanted to. Of course, a more representative majrority could rescind the actions later, provided the still can be rescinded. Maybe this would be an instance where Reconsider and Enter on the Minutes could be very useful.

[Gary Novosielski]

Certainly true. My thinking was that if enough show up to make a quorum, even though the meeting could continue, some/many members may have not attended thinking it had been (improperly) "canceled." Having enough "like-minded" members who felt the meeting should be properly Fixed to Adjourn, allowing the absentees the opportunity to attend at a later date (and giving them notice so they'd know), might help prevent an unscrupulous and powerful minority from holding the meeting in the absence of the absentees.

I think just about every meeting I've ever attended was held in the absence of the absentees.

But I may have just been lucky.

[David A Foulkes]

I think just about every meeting I've ever attended was held in the absence of the absentees.

But I may have just been lucky.

Maybe you just didn't check your email.

[Tim Wynn]

I think just about every meeting I've ever attended was held in the absence of the absentees.

But I may have just been lucky.

Right! The absentees who are present are the ones who worry me.