notification of meetings

[Guest Sandy]

Bylaws state " The secretary shall keep minutes of all regular and special meetings, all Board meetings, and see that members are notified at least ten days in advance of all meetings." Does this sufficiently imply that the Board meetings should be open to the members, even though it is not spelled out. For the past 10 years all board meetings have been open to members for imput and suggestions. This is a Social Club. The new Board has neglected to notify members of such meetings and will not allow members to attend the Board meetings. Thus, the only meetings for the general members are once a year. Help ! Thanks

[hmtcastle]

Does this sufficiently imply that the Board meetings should be open to the members, even though it is not spelled out.

No, not in my opinion (though it might mean that all general members must still be notified of all board meetings, for whatever good that will do them).

As far as RONR is concerned, only board members have a right to attend board meetings. The fact that your board once permitted non-members (of the board) to attend does not bind the board to this practice.

[Gary Novosielski]

Bylaws state " The secretary shall keep minutes of all regular and special meetings, all Board meetings, and see that members are notified at least ten days in advance of all meetings." Does this sufficiently imply that the Board meetings should be open to the members, even though it is not spelled out. For the past 10 years all board meetings have been open to members for imput and suggestions. This is a Social Club. The new Board has neglected to notify members of such meetings and will not allow members to attend the Board meetings. Thus, the only meetings for the general members are once a year. Help ! Thanks

"members" could be interpreted to apply to "all members of the body that is meeting," society members for membership meetings, board members for board meetings, etc. The purpose of that line appears to be to set the time that would be considered reasonable previous notice. But it's impossible to tell without considering the bylaws in their entirety, which the organization itself would have to figure out. I'd just be guessing (in fact that was just me, guessing.)

In general, non-members of the body that is meeting do not have the right to attend or speak at meetings, unless they are invited or permitted to attend by the members of the body. Even if they were notified, that doesn't imply they can attend.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Bylaws state

"The secretary shall keep minutes of all regular and special meetings, all Board meetings, and see that members are notified at least ten days in advance of all meetings."

Does this sufficiently imply that the Board meetings should be open to the members, even though it is not spelled out?

No.

There are at least 3 interpretations I pick up when I read that sentence.

The interpretation I get, among the two already mentioned by others, is this.

The duties of the secretary are these:

• keep the minutes of all regular meetings (of the general membership)

• keep the minutes of all special meetings (of the general membership)

• keep the minutes of all board meetings.

• at least 10 days in advance of all meetings, notify the members (of the body which is meeting).

A rule which is dedicated to describing a duty of an officer is unlikely to be a rule which also grants a secondary party a right to attend a meeting of a tertiary party.

There are many ordinary practices outside of parliamentary procedure where a party is notified of some kind of goings-on, yet the party so notified has no automatic right to attend.

Being notified that Congress is "meeting" or that the Federal Reserve Board is "meeting", is not the same thing as being invited to that meeting.

It might merely imply, "Now is a good time to contact your favorite board representative, and lobby hard for your issue, before your rep leaves town for the board meeting."

It might be that simple.

It might be purely a F.Y.I. (For Your Information) notification, and not a personal invite.

[David A Foulkes]

No, not in my opinion (though it might mean that all general members must still be notified of all board meetings, for whatever good that will do them).

As far as RONR is concerned, only board members have a right to attend board meetings. The fact that your board once permitted non-members (of the board) to attend does not bind the board to this practice.

Is there any reference here to the concept of custom, where a usual practice which is in conflict with a rule (RONR, bylaws, etc) that falls to the ground when a Point of Order is raised? (no book today, sorry no citation, but you know what I mean, right?) That is, rules don't enforce themselves, so someone has to stand up and say "Now hold on there a minute......" and raise the Point of Order.

[hmtcastle]

Is there any reference here to the concept of custom, where a usual practice which is in conflict with a rule (RONR, bylaws, etc) that falls to the ground when a Point of Order is raised?

The custom of permitting non-members to attend a meeting violates no rule so no point of order is needed (or warranted).

[David A Foulkes]

The custom of permitting non-members to attend a meeting violates no rule so no point of order is needed (or warranted).

Yeah, that makes sense. Thanks. It was just a thought......

[Josh Martin]

Is there any reference here to the concept of custom, where a usual practice which is in conflict with a rule (RONR, bylaws, etc) that falls to the ground when a Point of Order is raised? (no book today, sorry no citation, but you know what I mean, right?) That is, rules don't enforce themselves, so someone has to stand up and say "Now hold on there a minute......" and raise the Point of Order.

The rules regarding the customs of an assembly are covered in RONR, 10th ed., pg. 17, although in this case the custom does not conflict with any rule in the parliamentary authority (or in the assembly's governing documents, to the best of my knowledge). Thus, the custom should be adhered to unless the board votes to do otherwise, and it appears the board has done so.