Guest Jet Set Posted January 22, 2011 at 02:23 AM Report Share Posted January 22, 2011 at 02:23 AM Our club was having a board where members have a voice but no vote. A motion to close that meeting an have an "Exceutive" meeting was decided on. No members were allowed at this " Exceutive meeting. Is this ok in Roberts Rules of Order? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted January 22, 2011 at 02:33 AM Report Share Posted January 22, 2011 at 02:33 AM Our club was having a board where members have a voice but no vote. A motion to close that meeting an have an "Exceutive" meeting was decided on. No members were allowed at this " Exceutive meeting. Is this ok in Roberts Rules of Order?It's actually called Executive Session, and it's used for situations where secrecy is required. I'm guessing that the "members" who were excluded were members of the club but non-members of the board. If that's correct, then that is proper procedure.Non-members of the board (or any assembly or committee) have no inherent right even to attend meetings of that body, unless this is a special rule in your club. And the assumption is that while in Executive Session, only members of the body in session will attend, unless specifically invited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted January 22, 2011 at 01:05 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2011 at 01:05 PM . . . unless this is a special rule in your club.Which, apparently, it is. So it's up to "Jet Set" and his fellow members to determine just how far their "voice but no vote rule" status can take them. All things being equal, a rule that gives members of an association the right to attend meetings of the board would not be affected by the board meeting in executive session. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted January 22, 2011 at 07:43 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2011 at 07:43 PM [A]pparently, it is [a rule of that association]. So it's up to "Jet Set" and his fellow members to determine just how far their "voice but no vote rule" status can take them. All things being equal, a rule that gives members of an association the right to attend meetings of the board would not be affected by the board meeting in executive session.If that's so, then would you agree the special rule is suspendable, and non-members could be excluded by a 2/3 vote? Since it infringes on no basic membership right, I think this would be the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted January 22, 2011 at 08:26 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2011 at 08:26 PM If that's so, then would you agree the special rule is suspendable, and non-members could be excluded by a 2/3 vote? Since it infringes on no basic membership right, I think this would be the case.I'm afraid I'm not comfortable with suspending any rule in the bylaws (where I'm assuming this rule is enshrined). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 22, 2011 at 09:18 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2011 at 09:18 PM Which, apparently, it is. So it's up to "Jet Set" and his fellow members to determine just how far their "voice but no vote rule" status can take them. All things being equal, a rule that gives members of an association the right to attend meetings of the board would not be affected by the board meeting in executive session.I'm not sure "Our club was having a board where members have a voice but no vote" necessarily suggests a rule is in place on the subject. It might just be a custom of the board.If that's so, then would you agree the special rule is suspendable, and non-members could be excluded by a 2/3 vote? Since it infringes on no basic membership right, I think this would be the case.No, I would not, as this is likely a rule imposed by a superior body. The board cannot suspend a rule imposed upon it by the general membership. I think this is a reasonable extension of the principles in Official Interpretation 2006-12. The rule would be suspendable if the board is authorized to adopt its own rules and adopted this as a special rule of order, or if the rule provides for its own suspension.I'm afraid I'm not comfortable with suspending any rule in the bylaws (where I'm assuming this rule is enshrined).Well, as usual, I think that position goes too far, but I think your skepticism is appropriate in this case. Additionally, I think this rule would not be suspendable even if it was a special rule of order adopted by the general membership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted January 22, 2011 at 09:49 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2011 at 09:49 PM I'm not sure "Our club was having a board where members have a voice but no vote" necessarily suggests a rule is in place on the subject. It might just be a custom of the board.You may be right. I suspect the phrase "voice but no vote" suggested (bad) bylaws boilerplate to me. We've certainly seen it here before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.