If a member thoroughly disrupts an annual general meeting (AGM), can they be removed or prevented from attending in future?
Usually, AGMs are open to everyone although only members, or certain classes of members, have a vote. And members are normally entitled to attend members’ meetings. I don’t know of any way to exclude a member up-front, unless some legal mechanism such as a restraining order is in place.
Addressing root causes
Before considering removal or prevention, listen. The person may have been shouting or rambling or making off-the-wall points, but is a genuine concern being raised that the board should address? Is the disruptive member the spokesperson for a discontented faction or perhaps even the majority of the membership?
The board needs to recognize and respond to valid concerns raised by a single member too; a lone voice may be asking the most important questions. The answer may need to include a sincere apology for some omission and/or a promise to get back to members if a full answer is not readily available. The next board discussion should then focus on the root causes of member anger and how to change at least the communications with members. Real organizational change may be required to avoid losing supporters. The board needs to take the discontent seriously and accept responsibility for fixing the problems.
Keeping the meeting on track
However, it is difficult to even make an apology, let alone speak to key issues, while a person is dominating the floor and refusing to listen or let others speak.
You may be able to head this off in future. At the start of the next AGM, right after the confirmation of quorum and acceptance of the agenda, the chair can ask members to approve ground rules. Such rules could include being recognized by the chair before speaking, speaking only once regarding each agenda item, and limiting each speech to three minutes. Such rules can even be consolidated into an AGM rules document provided to the members in writing, and approved for all future meetings. Put this item on the draft agenda.
If the disruptive person ignores the rules, and/or ignores polite requests from the chair of the meeting, I have found it useful to simply go silent at the front of the room. See what the attendees do — they will likely ask the person to sit down and be quiet. They may ask more and more emphatically. The chair can support that request, and should not respond to the disruptive person’s remarks until the individual is seated and silent.
Note: The attendees will not help you if the disruptive person is or has been a respected elder in the community or organization. You may have to stay silent a long time until they run out of things to say, which will happen faster if there is no reaction from the front of the room than if you engage in dialogue. The attendees may also not be much help if they agree with the points being raised, or are intrigued by new and contentious information.
I’ve noticed that participants are much more proactive at getting a meeting back on track if there is a deadline. Book the space for one hour longer than you expect the meeting to last, and if the proceedings are being delayed, tell the audience why it cannot continue past that point. Perhaps another event is scheduled for the room or the building is closing for the day. Find a valid reason, if you can, to help you get through the mandatory agenda and avoid the cost of continuing the meeting another day.
If the disruption is really a personality conflict between the chair and a member, the chair could ask another officer to chair for the balance of that agenda item. That might get the meeting moving again. It’s important that whoever is chairing stay calm and focus on the organization not the individual. The individuals in question can arrange to meet another day.
Removal from the room
You asked if the person could be removed from the room. You can ask someone to leave and you can stay silent and refuse to continue with the agenda until they do. Again, if you have audience support, they can usually make the departure happen. However, you cannot physically make someone leave without risking assault charges.
If the person is making threatening comments or has hit someone, call the police. Keep in mind that severe disruptions may relate to the side effects of medications or to mental health issues. That’s not something volunteers can deal with alone. If you have reason to expect such behaviour, you may want to hire a security firm to protect the other attendees, including the board, until the police arrive.
Removal from membership
You also asked if a person could be removed from membership. Bylaws vary in how an existing membership can be cancelled, and should be followed with great care to minimize the chance of legal action. Courts will look with disfavour on nonprofits that do not give people due process, such as a chance to make their case in person, before cancelling or refusing to renew a membership. If the person doesn’t pay the required fees, or doesn’t sign a required document such as a Code of Ethics, removal is simpler than if the person is being removed for alleged unprofessional or unethical conduct.
And yes, you can make membership contingent on signing a Code of Conduct, but make sure the bylaws support that action and it is appropriate to the nature of the organization. I see it more in professional associations than charities. A signed Code is really helpful when speaking to a problematic member, since you can show them where they committed to a particular conduct different from the behaviour you have been seeing.
Prevention is better than damage control
In future, try to identify who is discontented and hear their concerns before the AGM. Have a dialogue about the underlying causes, not just the relatively trivial points that may initially be raised. Being heard may be all that is needed to avoid disruption at the AGM, particularly if you can commit to some follow-up action. I know this member took you by surprise, but be better prepared for next year.
Since 1992, Jane Garthson has dedicated her consulting and training business to creating better futures for our communities and organizations through values-based leadership. She is a respected international voice on governance, strategic thinking and ethics. Jane can be reached at jane@garthsonleadership.ca.
Because nonprofit organizations are formed to do good does not mean they are always good in their own practices. Send us your ethical questions dealing with volunteers, staff, clients, donors, funders, sponsors, and more. Please identify yourself and your organization so we know the questions come from within the sector. No identifying information will appear in this column. To submit a dilemma for a future column, or to comment on a previous one, please contact editor@charityvillage.com. For paid professional advice about an urgent or complex situation, contact Jane directly.
Disclaimer: This article is for information purposes only. It is not intended to be legal advice. You should not act or abstain from acting based upon such information without first consulting a legal professional.
Please note: While we ensure that all links and e-mail addresses are accurate at their publishing date, the quick-changing nature of the web means that some links to other web sites and e-mail addresses may no longer be accurate.