Under the nonprofit corporations act board meetings must be convened by the president and presided over by the president. Written notice of the time and place of the meeting must be sent to all board members and must state the issues to be discussed at the meeting. The notice must be sufficiently in advance. There are very clear rules for removing board members. There are provisions whereby board members can demand a board meeting and if the president fails to notice and hold the meeting they can then get a court order ordering the president to call the meeting.
But some board members cannot just privately get together and seize an organization.
I’m heavily involved in a non-profit in Canada, where the rules may be different.
The article states that Schlafly herself removed several members from the board the previous week. At least in Canada, this isn’t how board members are removed. While I’ve not read all of the posts, I’ve read a substantial number, and am struck that no one has picked up on this point. If Schlafly undertook a purge on her own initiative that was rogue, pushback might be expected. In your experience, can a founder dismiss members of the board on his own initiative?
Up here there are provisions for what must be done to convene without the president convening, and convening without the president. I can’t imagine not having such provisions since the incapacitation of the president (death or a coma) would decapitate the organization.
E-mail and teleconferencing has certainly changed things in Canada, and I imagine may be changing things down there, about what is necessary for notice of motion and what constitutes “place.”
Unless you know the actual rules of the specific corporation, you don’t know what they can and can not do.
I have seen this play out to many times. It is how corporations die.