Compensation of the State Chair Opinion
Date: March 12, 2025
Question From:
North Carolina Republican Party Eleventh District Executive Committee
Question(s) Presented:
We ask the full NCGOP Plan of Organization Committee rule on the following
questions:
1. Who authorized Chairman Simmons' pay? We ask these names are revealed
and for a ruling on their authority to make such decisions.
2. Is Chairman Simmons being employed as a subordinate of the Executive
Director in accordance with staffing provisions in the State Plan of
Organization and in what way this massive change in the governance of the
NCGOP has been approved by any of the State’s governing bodies.
3. Who determined the amount Chairman Simmons is being paid? We ask these
names are revealed and for a ruling on their authority to make such
decisions.
4. Who determined to change the amount Chairman Simmons was being paid
effective August, when he was elected to a non-paid position in March? We
ask these names are revealed and for a ruling on their authority to make
such decisions.
5. Why was this not brought forth to either the State Executive Committee or
Central Committee?
6. If the correct processes were not followed, what is the outcome for all parties
involved?
Answered by: Dan Barry, Chair; Mike Phillips, Vice-Chair, and Bill Scholtes on
behalf of the NCGOP Plan of Organization Committee.
Answer:
The Committee is consolidating these questions into a single inquiry for
consideration, as follows:
.
Does the North Carolina Republican Party 2024 Plan of Organization
provide explicit authority to any committee to grant compensation to
the State Chair, and if so, where does that authority reside? If there is
no explicit authority granted in the Plan of Organization, given our
structure, NCGOP precedence, and Robert’s Rules of Order, which
committee assumes this authority?
The 2024 North Carolina State Plan of Organization does not preclude
compensation being paid to the State Chair. In fact, we are aware that State Chairs
have been paid in the past.
The Plan does not contain any specific language providing explicit direction on
where the authority lies to negotiate compensation for the State Chair. Article VI B
2 provides for the Powers and Duties of the State Executive Committee as holding
the “supreme management of all affairs of the Party within the State. It may
delegate such duties as it deems proper to the State Central Committee.” Article VI
A 2 a provides that once delegated, the State Central Committee is authorized “to do
all things pertaining to Party affairs which it may be authorized to do by the State
Executive Committee.”
The Plan of Organization Committee recognizes the precedent established by
former State Chairs receiving compensation, a practice which it understands was
agreed to and approved in each instance by the State Central Committee. Further,
the Budget Resolution passed by the State Executive Committee grants broad
authority to the Executive Director and the State Central Committee to manage
financial affairs and daily operations of the North Carolina Republican Party.
Additionally, the State Central Committee serves as the administrative body
directing the day to day affairs of the North Carolina Republican Party and the
administration of the budget approved by the State Executive Committee.
Prior to the current Chair, one or more Chairs had agreed to work without pay even
though it was customary for the State Chair to be paid a salary plus expenses. It is
reasonable to conclude, and we do conclude, that compensating the Chair has
become a custom which is described in Robert’s Rules of Order:
2:25 In some organizations, a particular practice may sometimes come to be
followed as a matter of established custom so that it is treated practically as
if it were prescribed by a rule. If there is no contrary provision in the
parliamentary authority or written rules of the organization, such an
established custom is adhered to unless the assembly, by a majority vote,
agrees in a particular instance to do otherwise. However, if a customary
practice is or becomes in conflict with the parliamentary authority or any
written rule, and a Point of Order (23) citing the conflict is raised at any time,
the custom falls to the ground, and the conflicting provision in the
parliamentary authority or written rule must thereafter be complied with. If
it is then desired to follow the former practice, a special rule of order (or, in
appropriate circumstances, a standing rule or a bylaw provision) can be
added or amended to incorporate it. (Emphasis added)
Regarding the provision cited above in response to providing payment to the Chair,
there is no contrary provision in the parliamentary authority or the written rules of
the organization (the Plan of Organization) that precludes the Party from paying a
salary to the Chair. Accepting the willingness of one or more Chairs to volunteer to
work without compensation does not singularly negate the custom. The Central
Committee would have been well advised to vote to no longer adhere to the custom
of compensating the Chair if that outcome is the one it expected. It has not done so.
Thus, in the opinion of the North Carolina Republican Party State Plan of
Organization Committee, the authority to commit resources, negotiate terms, and
execute an agreement to compensate the State Chair resides with the State Central
Committee as a matter of custom. This authority has not been revoked by the State
Executive Committee, a fact which implies that it has ratified the practice.
Consequently, the State Central Committee continues to possess the authority to
compensate the State Chair. In exercising this authority, it follows that the State
Central Committee has the right to information regarding compensation and
benefits provided to the State Chair.
Based on the opinion above, all other questions presented to the State Plan of
Organization Committee are hereby referred to the State Central Committee for
their deliberations and further consideration.
Approved on March 12, 2025 by the North Carolina Plan of Organization Committee
with a unanimous vote. Committee member Hunter Clark of the 11th District was
recused from deliberation, and the vote.