Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Roll Call Vote Election

    This is just election by blank-filling, is it not? (But how do you sequence the candidates? By pre-election polling?)
  3. Roll Call Vote Election

    Oh yes it is, for a viva voce election, p. 442 - or almost anyway - the use of a roll-call does cloud the issue a bit. RONR speaks to that combination but p. 443 isn't clear whether the responses by the voters are names or Yes/No votes. I wonder if Guest T Henle's organization bylaws require ballot votes. If so the (public) roll-call system is improper no matter how the voters respond.
  4. Today
  5. Roll Call Vote Election

    Or give another name as a "write in," unless your rules specifically preclude it. The only thing I can think of is if they treated each candidate as a yes or no vote, and then waited to see which candidate received the greater majority (or voted again if neither one achieved a majority). That is clearly not a proper way to conduct an election in accordance with RONR.
  6. Official Opinion

    Thank you!
  7. Roll Call Vote Election

    I'm curious - what is the alternative where they vote more than once?
  8. Elections

    I agree with Mr. Mervosh's correct answer. However, the assembly may, by motion (or unanimous consent), decide to permit "campaign speeches" and/or discussion of the candidates at any time prior to voting. Many organizations have a rule providing for this or do it by custom.
  9. Roll Call Vote Election

    That's correct, or they may abstain.
  10. Elections

    You should check with your school board's attorney. The attorney will know which voting method must be used.
  11. If a roll call vote is used during elections when there are 2 nominations, does each board member announce which candidate they choose during the roll call vote which would require them to vote only once. We typically had only one nomination in the past and conducted a voice vote.
  12. Elections

    Thank you. If we have 2 nominations, are we able to do a roll call vote where each board member announces which candidate they choose?
  13. Official Opinion

    Perhaps you could read through some responses on topics and find one of us who you think gives good answers, and then send them a message asking for information. We all have our owns rates and ways of working. So cost needs to be negotiated with a particular parliamentarian. Alternatively, both the National Association of Parliamentarians (NAP) and the American Institute of Parliamentarians (AIP) have referral services on their websites.
  14. Official Opinion

    Not inappropriate but it would be best to contact either the NAP or AIP for a local reference: Contact either (or both) the ... National Association of Parliamentarians 213 South Main St. Independence, MO 64050-3850 Phone: 888-627-2929 Fax: 816-833-3893; e-mail: hq@NAP2.org <<www.parliamentarians.org>> or American Institute of Parliamentarians 618 Church Street, Ste 220 Nashville, TN 37219 phone: 888-664-0428 e-mail: aip@aipparl.org << www.aipparl.org >> for a reference or information. Both organizations offer training and contacts with local parliamentarians.
  15. Official Opinion

    Hi I was wondering if it's possible to get a professional opinion on some parliamentarian issues from any parliamentarians on this site and what the cost would be? I hope it's not inappropriate to ask that question.
  16. Motion from out of town members

    Well, certainly agree with that. I got interested in parliamentary procedure because I used to go to meetings that ran hours and accomplished nothing - and the only reason they weren't longer was that the library closed at 9. But I think it's important that we emphasize not to engage in formalism for its own sake. The General emphasized this, and I think he got it right. I hear from too many people "well, yea, our meetings suck, but if we used RONR, they'd still suck because we'd be arguing about the rules instead of going in circles." Important to show these people that that outcome isn't predetermined.
  17. Joshua, I have noticed the same thing and coincidently putting together a training for a group for which I have been parliamentarian. Anyone who has a chance to compare a meeting without "formalism" with one that has it would never again go back to the anarchy of a meeting without parliamentary law.
  18. Majority of quorum

    It's discussed at some length in this thread, too, which in turn makes reference to the thread cited by Mr. Honemann: http://robertsrules.forumflash.com/topic/27659-majority-of-a-quorum-or-23-of-a-quorum/ I would consider the post by Mr. Honemann authoritative.
  19. Majority of quorum

    It may help to take a look at this thread in the Advanced Discussion Forum.
  20. Majority of quorum

    There is no such phrase in RONR, for good reason. If it's in a set of governing documents you're reading that group will have to figure out what it means.
  21. Majority of quorum

    The term "majority of a quorum" baffles me. It seems (1) redundant and (2) ambiguous. Redundant because a vote cannot be taken without a quorum present so why specify "majority of a quorum?" Ambiguous because it would seem to be subject to interpretation. Suppose an organization has 24 member and the bylaws state that 25% of the membership constitutes a quorum. Then 6 members would make up a quorum and 4 would be a majority of a quorum. Then suppose 20 members are present for the vote. A majority of those present would now be 11. Now 16 people vote in favor of the motion and 4 oppose. A majority of a quorum opposed. Does the motion fail? That's silly, of course, but in a world where millions of dollars can rest on the presence or absence of an "Oxford comma," it seems strange to use an ambiguous and redundant phrase. Any comments?
  22. The "About Me" section of members' profiles is not accessible on my android cell phone. Is anyone else having this problem? Is this the case with all cell phones, just android phones, or just my phone? If I access a member profile from my laptop, I have the option of clicking on the "About Me" section of the profile to read it, provided the member has entered anything in that section of his profile. But the "About Me" option does not appear on my cellphone. I looked the top 20 or 24 posters (everyone with over 1,000 posts) and found that about one-third of us have information in the "About Me" section of their profiles that I can view on my laptop. But, I cannot view ANY "About Me" sections using my phone. Is there some reason for this, or is it a glitch? It's hard to find and sort the member list since the forum update of a couple of years ago, but you can access it using the "search" function. Click on "search", then click on "members", then click on that, and the member list in alphabetical order pops up. There is then an option to change the sort method to sort by post count, etc. This link might work: http://robertsrules.forumflash.com/search/?type=core_members&sortby=member_posts&sortdirection=desc&page=1
  23. Elections for President/Vice-President

    I understand your concern, but I think the clause in the bylaws that says, "The Vice President shall be President-elect" takes care of that issue. It's the only way to give that provision meaning. Having a president-elect is common enough that I think the term is understood well enough as to not need elaboration, although most bylaws I have seen with that provision do go into a bit more detail.
  24. Elections for President/Vice-President

    That's not the contradiction. The contradiction (which is resolvable) is that it also says the officers are elected, without including any exception. The President is an officer, and is not elected.
  25. Elections for President/Vice-President

    No "contradiction", but it seems to me to be a bad idea: A "President-Elect" strikes me as a sort of trainee position, where the future president learns (by watching, &c. for a year or so) the ropes and how to be a president. A Vice-President is someone who is (in the ideal situation, anyway) ready to become the president on a moment's notice. No training involved. These two concepts don't fit together very well. The two offices probably should not be combined, but that is up to the association in question.
  26. Elections for President/Vice-President

    I agree with Mr. Katz, but would add that it is not that unusual for an organization to never directly elect its president but to instead elect a vice president / president-elect who automatically becomes present at the end of the president's term. I don't see that as a contradiction.
  27. Motion from out of town members

    There are a few question types that I suspect embody some misconceptions about parliamentary procedure. This is one of them. It's hard to say what, but there seems to be some sort of mistake underlying an issue of this type. I've seen the same thing in some organizations - well, this is a motion to give money to this state, so this person from that state should make it. A theory: as I mentioned in an earlier thread today, it reflects a belief (which, to be fair, we parliamentarians don't always do much to dispel) that many, or most, rules are about formalisms, and procedure for its own sake. I ran into this, in a few ways, when I taught a class last summer for municipal officials. First, there was my boss, who pulled me aside to say that, yes, he knows I'm a parliamentarian, but please, don't insist on government officials engaging in mindless formalisms. I was taken aback because when he said it, I was working on a class outline that focused on why parliamentary procedure isn't a bunch of mindless formalisms. Then there were the students. I walked in prepared to explain the practical value of our rules and how they facilitate, not hinder, business - and I found that most of the questions I got during class assumed that parliamentarians love formalism for its own sake (aside from a few that, I suspect, might have been attempts to develop strategies for hindering business). It's an interesting dilemma.
  1. Load more activity
×