[ SHOWGSD-L ] Re: AKC Conference - Confidentiality issues
- From: Peggy <pmick12@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: nancy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 23:45:00 -0400
It is interesting to note that in matters of law, such secret
meetings/executive meetings, whatever you want to call them, have been
found to violate
the intention of having such meetings, especially when serious decisions
and votes are made or take place at such "closed" sessions and the meetings
were closed to avoid open and perhaps heated discussion. .
Open meetings laws "are there for a purpose:" public discourse and open
decision-making. The purpose of the BOG is to advise
members what business was conducted...closing sessions precludes this
information sharing...I would never myself take it to court..
.but I would bet a court would find the executive sessions held this
year, where the express purpose was to avoid public discourse
and open decision-making, that is, specifically to keep business secret
from the members, to be improper, and in violation of the spirit
of having such a club in the first place.
I feel obligated to remind the list that if it were not for a
closed "executive" session, most of this nonsense would have occurred
anyway, because Andrew Hunte would never have been allowed to become a
member of the GSDCA. That first closed meeting,
which resulted in him being allowed to become a member, is what started
all the problems we have faced this year with the possible
exception of the current situation concerning the Club Secretary.
also, Mike Liosis notwithstanding, if he didn't have the GSDCA
By-Laws in hand, could very well have been speaking
out of turn. Just because he works for the AKC doesn't mean he's
infallible. Nice guy, tho.
Peggy.........
Nancy Harper wrote:
>Diana,
>Thank you very much for sharing the information from Mike Liosis. It is
>very important for the members of the GSDCA to know and understand that
>certain rules should be followed pertaining to the 'protection of the
>society: and the members within that society.
>
>Not every issue can be addressed in a Society's By-Laws, it is impossible to
>do so. Roberts' Rules takes up where By-Laws leave off. If a situation
>presents itself that calls for a decision backed by action.& By-Laws do not
>address that particular issue it's a good thing that Robert's is there to
>guide a governing body. By -Laws also trump Policy and Procedures if the
>two conflict on a particular issue.
>What about the ethics of discussing a sensitive subject in an open forum?
>Do we not have a responsibility to protect our members?
>It is too bad that some of our members believe that Executive Sessions have
>been held because of a desire to keep information from the membership.
>Executive Sessions, of which there have been very few, have been held, in
>my opinion, for very legitimate reasons.
>Nancy Harper
>
>
============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2007. All material remains the property of the original
author and of GSD Communication, Inc. NO REPRODUCTIONS or FORWARDS of any kind
are permitted without prior permission of the original author AND of the
Showgsd-l Management. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
ALL PERSONS ARE ON NOTICE THAT THE FORWARDING, REPRODUCTION OR USE IN ANY
MANNER OF ANY MATERIAL WHICH APPEARS ON SHOWGSD-L WITHOUT THE EXPRESS
PERMISSION OF ALL PARTIES TO THE POST AND THE LIST MANAGEMENT IS EXPRESSLY
FORBIDDEN, AND IS A VIOLATION OF LAW. VIOLATORS OF THIS PROHIBITION WILL BE
PROSECUTED.
For assistance, please contact the List Management at admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
VISIT OUR WEBSITE - www.showgsd.org
============================================================================
Other related posts: