I have two questions for you. I hope I can explain both scenarios -
I observed a meeting last night (not our Parish), when both the Chair and Vice chair had resigned prior to the meeting. There were only 4 councillors (there are only 4 now) at the meeting but enough for the meeting to continue; plus 6 members of the public (meeting was virtual) The meeting was 'abandoned' due to the fact they could not agree a chairperson to preside for the meeting that evening..... 2 people wanting to be chair etc....
My question is what happens at that situation ?
Secondly if they had identified a chairperson to preside that evenings meeting, could they then have elected a 'substantive chair person' if though it was not on their agenda for that meeting?
A chairperson has resigned from the Parish and at the meeting a 'chairperson' was asked to preside for that meeting The vice is on secondment.
We have been advised we should wait for the Vice to return from his secondment in end January to elect our new chair? We are not happy about this and would like to elect a chair prior to this. Its clear to us that the vice chair wants to be at the meeting so he can put himself forward to be chair. Preside the meeting so have the extra vote to vote himself in. This stinks to me......We do have a person who would make an excellent chairperson, works hard, brilliant with the community etc etc. I am going to ask that this item is placed on the agenda for our December meeting, can the clerk refuse to add it to the agenda. Second part of my question, without a chair or vice at the moment, who actually can make decisions. In the past, in between meetings the chair is contacted and he makes the decisions. I thought the role of the chair was to chair meetings and has no extra powers.
I be grateful to your advice