BOARD-L Archives

Archiver > BOARD > 2007-08 > 1187889377


From: "George Waller" <>
Subject: Re: [BOARD] Motion 07-18 - Amendment to Motion 02-12 - DISCUSSION
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:17:26 -0400
In-Reply-To: <02e501c7e580$09c2bb80$7301a8c0@scott>


No discussion

On 23 Aug 2007 at 7:20, Scott Burow wrote:

> It has been moved by Mike Peterson and seconded by Karen De
> Groote-Johnson that the decision of the Advisory Board regarding the
> appeal of Teresa Lindquist of Motion 02-12 be adopted and that Motion
> 02-12 be amended.
>
> The motion is numbered 07-18 and is open for discussion. If you have
> no discussion, please advise by stating "no discussion".
>
> Motion 07-18 is as follows:
>
> I move that the following be adopted as an amendment to Motion 02-12:
>
> "After reviewing all the information and evidence presented in the
> Teresa Lindquist appeal to rescind Motion 02-12, the AB finds the
> following:
>
> Before proceeding with a review upon appeal, the Advisory Board has a
> responsibility to examine its ability and authority to review the
> decision made by the prior Board in Motion 02-12. The only mention of
> a Motion to Appeal in Sturgis relates to a motion to appeal the
> decision of the chair. This motion is not applicable to the current
> situation in that the action being appealed is not a decision of the
> chair. Parliamentary law and common law recognize the inherent right
> of members to have redress for decisions that address their status or
> standing as a member of the organization, and recognizes the inherent
> right of the organization to amend and correct errors which may have
> been made in both procedure and fact. The Board must also consider the
> intent and content of Motion 02-12 at the time of its passage, and the
> intent of the Advisory Board at the time, which made provision for
> appeal. It must be concluded that under Sturgis, parliamentary law,
> and common law an appeal can be made of Motion 02-12 in order for the
> member to have redress and to correct any errors that may have been
> made.
>
> Disciplinary action against members is an inherent right of the
> organization (Sturgis, p. 222-224). For the purpose of the current
> appeal regarding the findings of Motion 02-12, the Advisory Board has
> reviewed the materials available, the written appeal of Ms. Lindquist,
> and the evidence presented. This opinion will address the two
> pertinent sections of Motion 02-12, which are entitled Decision and
> Penalty in order to be consistent with the wording in Sturgis. All
> items not claimed to be in error in the appeal have been judged to be
> true and accurate.
>
> REGARDING THE DECISION REACHED IN MOTION 02-12:
>
> The finding of the Advisory Board in Motion 02-12 is affirmed as to
> the statement that Teresa Lindquist exhibited total disregard and
> disrespect as evident in her public posting of executive session
> correspondence, betraying the trust of fellow board members and all
> members of the project that have brought concerns and grievances
> forward.
>
> Ms. Lindquist in her appeal does not contest that finding.
>
> REGARDING THE PENALTY ASSESSED IN MOTION 02-12:
>
> Ms. Lindquist contests the imposition of the status of Member Not in
> Good Standing, based upon the opinion of a previous Advisory Board's
> Parliamentarian, D. Joshua Taylor, that it is invalid as it does not
> contain an ending date, and is, therefore, permanent. The Advisory
> Board finds that Motion 02-12 validly imposed the status of Member Not
> In Good Standing for the acts as described in the decision. That
> penalty, however, was improperly applied in that it did not include a
> termination date or a method for the member to otherwise regain her
> status as a Member in Good Standing in lieu of a termination date.
>
> OPINION OF THE ADVISORY BOARD AND RESOLUTION:
>
> Having found the penalty phase of the Advisory Board in Motion 02-12
> to be improperly applied, it is the duty of this Advisory Board to
> amend, adjust, or otherwise correct the application of the penalty,
> taking into account the period of time that has elapsed since the
> imposition of the original disciplinary action and the contributions
> of the member which may serve to mitigate the need or the nature of
> the consequence imposed.
>
> The Advisory Board notes that after almost 5 years the publication of
> executive session correspondence leading to Motion 02-12 remains
> publicly posted. The Advisory Board finds that the passage of time has
> not reduced the disregard, disrespect, and betrayal of that action.
>
> The Advisory Board notes that Ms. Lindquist contacted the Board on May
> 21, 2007 and stated. "I am not interesting [sic] in having the Board
> lift my Not In Good Standing status. I want the Board to recognize
> and correct the illegal actions taken by its predecessor and rescind
> Motion 02-12." This Board will comply with the request of Ms.
> Lindquist in part, and will correct the improper application of an
> otherwise validly imposed penalty.
>
> A breach of trust among members is unfortunate and a breach of trust
> among elected officers is intolerable. A breach of trust and
> confidentiality between an elected officer and the members of an
> organization is a travesty and should never be taken lightly.
>
> It is the finding of the Advisory Board that the penalty assessed in
> Motion 02-12 be amended to read as follows:
>
> "Teresa Lindquist will be made a Member Not In Good Standing for a
> period of 10 years, retroactive to the initial date of Motion 02-12 on
> July 12, 2002.
>
> If Ms Lindquist desires to have that status lifted prior to the
> expiration of that time, she may do so by communication of the
> following to the National Coordinator:
>
> 1. That she has permanently removed all confidential executive
> session correspondence from public view and will cease to distribute
> any materials that were held in confidence by the Advisory Board at
> the time of her participation without the consent of those members
> involved.
>
> 2. That she is prepared to accept responsibility for the violation of
> trust and confidence placed in her by making a public apology to the
> membership for her actions.
>
> 3. That she is willing to be a contributing member of the USGenWeb
> Project as evidenced by her ability to abide by the bylaws, rules, and
> procedures established for all members of the project.
>
> Should Ms. Lindquist choose to have the status of Member Not in Good
> Standing lifted and to comply with the conditions stated above, she
> will be placed on a probationary status for a period of one (1) year.
> During her period of probationary status she will answer to the
> Advisory Board for any actions which are not in compliance with
> accepted project policy or membership. During that probationary year
> if Ms. Lindquist engages in any actions that the AB finds to be out of
> compliance with the probationary rules herein and accepted project
> bylaws, rules, and procedures established for its members, the penalty
> will be reinstatement of the Member Not In Good Standing status until
> July 12, 2012."
>
>
> Scott Burow
> NC - USGenWeb Project
>
>
> USGenWeb Project information can be found at: http://www.usgenweb.com
> ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please
> send an email to with the word
> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the
> message
>


This thread: