King Kong raises his ugly head

[lizardrand]

We are a group of about 80 people who live in a HUD operated apartment complex for low income seniors and disabled people. We had floor representatives, but wanted to have a tenant association, and so set up elections, but were not using RONR at the time. The person who was elected president had to retire for medical reasons, and so the floor representatives appointed David to be president. He then asked me (Liz) to be parliamentarian. We had two board meetings before our first tenants meetings, during which the tenants voted to adopt Roberts Rules for Dummies (they didn't want the more formal RONR), but also decided not to have any by-laws. During the two board meetings prior to the tenants meeting, and during the tenants meeting, David showed himself to be a major King Kong. He ignored unanimous votes of the board, ignored the agenda for the meeting, failed to follow even the simplest format for an agenda (with the result that no time frame for future meetings was set, nor was any date set for a next meeting), told stories from his personal life, performed a mime routine (which the board had unanimously voted that he couldn't do, publicly embarrassed several board members on multiple occasions by verbally harranguing them, refused to follow the agenda, tried to tell personal stories at times when a vote was called for repeatedly, and co-opted members of the board by taking over tasks that he had assigned for them to do. As a result, what should have been a 45 minute meeting took an hour and 45 minutes. After the meeting multiple tenants sought out the board members to express their extreme displeasure, and to state that they would not attend another board meeting if David was to preside.

The board members and parliamentarian then met in a Special Session to decide what to do about David. Every possible option that would allow him to continue as president was discussed, but we finally came to the conclusion that he would be unable to change his behaviors (and he confirmed this for us when we later met with him to discuss the situation), and so it was decided to ask him to resign. We met with him for this purpose, but he refused to resign. He was then informed that his appointment as president was being rescinded by unanimous vote of the board members (the parliamentarian didn't vote, as per RONR regulations), and the vice president became the president. However, David has continued to refuse to accept the board's decision, claiming that he must be voted out by the people who voted him in. However, since he wasn't elected to the office of president, but was appointed when the person who was elected was unable to serve, the board believes that it was correct in rescinding his appointment, particularly since RONR were NOT in effect at the time that he was appointed, as there was no tenants association in existence at that time. There are still no by-laws that govern the tenants association. The board believes that it was correct RONR procedure to rescind his appointment as president, since RONR wasn't in effect at the time that he was appointed, and so a vote of the tenants isn't needed to rescind his appointment. Further, because the tenants association has no by-laws, the board believes that its actions can be taken without violating any of RONR.

Please advise us as to your opinions in this matter so that we can more effectively deal with King Kong.

Thank you,

Liz Randolph

[Josh Martin]

We had two board meetings before our first tenants meetings, during which the tenants voted to adopt Roberts Rules for Dummies (they didn't want the more formal RONR),

This was your first mistake. Robert's Rules for Dummies is not a parliamentary authority. It is a third-party guide to assist assemblies in interpreting Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised. It is written by a well-respected parliamentarian, and from what I hear from those who have read it, it is a very good third-party guide, but it is still intended to supplement RONR, not replace it. You should fix this as soon as possible. See How Your Organization Can Adopt Robert's Rules.

but also decided not to have any by-laws.

This was your second mistake. Bylaws are what defines your organization's existence, membership, board of directors, etc. You should fix this as soon as possible. See RONR, 10th ed., Section 54: Organization of a Permanent Society.

He was then informed that his appointment as president was being rescinded by unanimous vote of the board members (the parliamentarian didn't vote, as per RONR regulations), and the vice president became the president. However, David has continued to refuse to accept the board's decision, claiming that he must be voted out by the people who voted him in.

David is absolutely right. Only the assembly which elected him has the power to remove him. You don't even really have a board, since you have no Bylaws.

However, since he wasn't elected to the office of president, but was appointed when the person who was elected was unable to serve, the board believes that it was correct in rescinding his appointment,

You don't have a board. As for this "appointment" argument, I agree that you majorly botched the process for handling elections of officers in a mass meeting, but I don't see where you get from that to the board having the power to remove him. Unless your non-existent board was the body that appointed him.

particularly since RONR were NOT in effect at the time that he was appointed

An assembly which has not adopted a parliamentary authority is bound by the common parliamentary law, and RONR is the foremost authority on the common parliamentary law. I should also point out that RONR isn't really in effect now either, since your assembly has adopted Robert's Rules for Dummies as its parliamentary authority.

as there was no tenants association in existence at that time.

The first meeting would have been in the nature of a mass meeting, which still follows the common parliamentary law.

There are still no by-laws that govern the tenants association.

Well, then your meetings are still in the nature of mass meetings as you have not yet completed all the steps in organizing a permanent society.

The board believes that it was correct RONR procedure to rescind his appointment as president since RONR wasn't in effect at the time that he was appointed, and so a vote of the tenants isn't needed to rescind his appointment.

See above for the reasons why none of these arguments have any validity.

Further, because the tenants association has no by-laws, the board believes that its actions can be taken without violating any of RONR.

The fact that the association has no Bylaws actually means the association has no board, so the board can't do anything.

Please advise us as to your opinions in this matter so that we can more effectively deal with King Kong.

The assembly is the only body with the authority to remove King Kong. I suppose you could also argue that since David was never properly elected in the first place he never was President, but only the assembly has the authority to decide on that question of order. After that, you might want to deal with the larger problems of actually adopting Bylaws and a real parliamentary authority

Actually, you might want to forget all about David and just start over from scratch, following Section 54 of RONR, and getting it right this time, since you've all made such a horrible mess of this.

[hmtcastle]

Please advise us as to your opinions in this matter . . .

You should, at least, get a copy of RONR In Brief; a summary of the 10% of RONR you'll use 90% of the time. You'll also need RONR itself, but only occasionally.