Board approval dates:

• Created on: 05/28/2024
• Most recent update: 06/07/2024

Voting members of the Community Board shall always take steps to recuse themselves from any board discussions pertaining to decisions which generate or appear to generate any conflicts of interest for themselves, including but not limited to financial conflicts of interest. Where voting on any motion is required (e.g., to maintain a quorum to allow business to be conducted) recusing members should “ABSTAIN” when the vote is called.

“Recusal” refers to the act of a Community Board member voluntarily withdrawing from participation in certain kinds of discussions, deliberations, and decision-making processes. Where appropriate, recusals help to maintain the integrity and trust of the Community Board’s decision-making process. Recusals ensure that decisions are made in the best interest of the college, not in the interests of the individuals making the decisions.

Community Board members should recuse themselves from discussions and decisions in the following kinds of specific situations:

• Conflict of Interest: If a board member has a personal or financial interest in the outcome of a decision, then they should recuse themselves to avoid any appearance of impropriety. Recusal would be the appropriate step, regardless of whether or not the board member believes that they are able make fair and unbiased decisions regarding the matter in question. Recusal would also be appropriate in any situations where a board member’s family member or business might benefit from the board’s decision.

• Personal Relationships: Recusal is appropriate when a decision involves an individual or organization with which the board member has a close personal relationship, such as a family member, friend, or significant business associate.

• Dual Roles: If the board member holds another position or role within the organization (e.g., employee, intern) they should recuse themselves from decisions that may impact their role either positively or negatively (e.g., an approval of a new Employee Handbook, a change in internship attendance policy).

• Competing Interests: Recusal is appropriate when a board member is involved with another organization that could be seen as a competitor or has a stake in the same issue being discussed.

• Legal or Ethical Issues: In situations where there might be legal or ethical implications for the board member’s involvement, recusal is necessary to maintain the integrity of the board and the organization.

The presiding officer of the Community Board (usually the Chair) is the individual charged with administering and managing most recusal related matters, and should be careful to correctly apply best practice standards. If the Chair is required for whatever reason to recuse from a matter, this would require that the Chair temporarily relinquish the presiding officer role, while the matter in question is discussed.

In most cases, recusals will usually be initiated by the recusing board members themselves giving notice to the presiding officer, including communicating the reason for the recusal.

The presiding officer should note the recusal publicly during the meeting to ensure that all other board members are aware of the recusal decision. Recusals should also always be recorded in meeting minutes for transparency’s sake.

In the absence of a preemptive self-recusal step by an affected board member, the presiding officer may use their discretion to alert members to the need for them to recuse in specific circumstances. In cases in which a required recusal decision was not made initially, but was later noted after a discussion and vote, the presiding officer may use their discretion to require a reconsideration of the decision in question.

Recusals may take different forms, depending on the presiding officer’s assessment of the situation. For example, a recusing individual may be asked by the presiding officer to completely exit from the board meeting temporarily for the duration of the recused discussion and vote. This is often the most straightforward approach. But sometimes the presiding officer may decide to permit a recusing individual to remain present during the meeting, but refraining from any direct participation in discussions.

If the presiding officer permits a recusing individual to remain present but silent while a discussion takes place, care should be taken to ensure that other board members do not feel awkward or constrained from full and free discussion by the presence of the recused member.

In rare cases, if voting on decisions requires the presence or participation of the recused member (e.g., in order to maintain a quorum to allow business to be conducted) then the recusing member should vote “ABSTAIN” when the presiding officer calls the vote.

Management of recusal processes and decisions will typically be left up to the presiding officer’s discretion, bearing in mind best practice approaches.

Examples of When Recusals are Appropriate

• Employee members of the board (staff or faculty) should always recuse themselves from any board discussions that may lead to changes in institution-wide compensation rates or payroll or benefit structures.

• Student members of the board should recuse from discussions about changes in Academy program fees or tuition rates whenever those changes may affect them.

• Board members who are also patients in the Academy’s internship clinics should recuse from any discussions about clinic fee structures, treatment discounts, or other kinds of treatment related benefits.

• Grievances: recusals are appropriate for any board member who is a named party in a grievance or appeal document submitted by any Academy community member to the board for review as part of a published institutional procedure or process. For obvious reasons a recusal decision would always be required for any grievances that may be filed by board members themselves. But recusal would also be appropriate in cases where a board member is specifically named in a grievance filed by another person (e.g., a faculty Community Board member who is named party in a student grievance document). Because they inherently involve disputes and potentially conflict, the presiding officer should always require a recusing individual to fully exit from any meeting at which discussions involving grievances may occur, in order to ensure free and open consideration of the matter by the rest of the board.

• Employee board members should recuse themselves from any matters involving grievances or employment appeals filed by other individuals associated with the college who are either now or were previously their direct supervisor(s) or direct supervisee(s). For the reasons described above, a full exit from a meeting discussion is appropriate for these kinds of recusals.