A cathedral holds an Annual General Meeting and one of the agenda items has to do with the potential firing of one of the senior clergy.
The clergyman in question absents himself from the meeting and after discussion a ballot vote is taken regarding whether or not to fire this clergyman.
The highest ranking clergy (he had no greater standing at the meeting than any other member) of the diocese was unhappy with the results and is refusing to release them.
It was a duly constituted meeting and all of the requirements for validity were met.
My questions are these:
1)CAN he refuse to release the results (according to Rob’s rules)?
2)If so where in Rob’s does it say so, if not where does it say so?
3)Regardless of whether he releases the results are they still valid?
4)Is there any way that a vote taken at an AGM that obeys all of the requisite forms can be declared invalid in the absence of violation (no rigging, stuffing, or other shenanigans ensued)?
is there anything in the canons of the diocese that speak to this issue? Roberts are used to govern meetings, but they’re usually subordinate to the canons or bylaws of the institution.
Gbro - Thanks very much for the link. I will definitely try there as well
Northern Piper - As far as I know there is nothing in the cannons or bylaws allowing this. But the truth is I really have no clue. This is a bit o’ politics happening at the church my mom goes to and she came to me for info - so naturally I came to the Straight Dope.
I wouldn’t have thought that Robert’s Rules were of any relevance at all in this situation unless the church/diocese/cathedral chapter or whatever it is have at some point positively decided to adopt them. Is there some reason to think they have?
Yes, they have formally adopted them but for the most part have very little idea what they are and how they function. They know how to make and second a motion but beyond things like that they’re largely in the dark.
Basically mom saw a situation she didn’t like and, since it involved the meeting, looked to Robert’s Rules (via her loving son) for remedy since those rules govern meetings.
In the end it is really a bylaw issue. If their bylaws allow for this sort of tomfoolery then it is permissable. If not then it isn’t. <— This I found out through asking many people more wizenned than me including Dopers and those on a site recommended by Dopers.
Robert’s Rules is a formal approach to running meetings.
The hiring and firing of staff is a personnel issue, governed by the policies of the organization, subject to local, state and/or federal employment laws (and any additional contracts or agreements such as a union).
By what mechanism is the senior clergy refusing to release the vote? Was he in charge of counting it? In that case, he’s completely out of order.
I’m not an expert, but I have been to my share of meetings, and it seems to me that the minutes of the meeting (on which the outcome of the vote was recorded) are a legal document that are open to all and sundry, or at least anyone with an appropriate interest in the result.
More generally, a vote is a vote and I can’t think of any procedure to simply override it, whatever its outcome, by whoever unless they are specifically empowered to do so by your by-laws.
It’s way too late for this, and I’m more familiar with the Code Morin (what we use in Quebec) than Robert’s, but if I have time/energy/interest I’ll look it up tomorrow.
