jstackpo

Members
  • Content count

    6,963
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About jstackpo

Profile Information

  • Location
    : Fort Washington, Maryland
  1. Sneaky... but it would work only if the folks stepping out did not break the quorum requirement for the number of members present and staying in the room to vote. And with a roll call vote the (possible) lack of a quorum would be self evident.
  2. Bylaws take priority over "policies" (AKA "Standing Rules", p. 18) so if old policies come into conflict with newly adopted bylaw provisions, the bylaws take precedence - p. 12ff. - and the policies are nullified.
  3. You really mean "postpone" not "table". See RONR p. 215ff. Once the motion is postponed, it should come up automatically as a "General Order" at the next meeting, see p. 185 and p. 26. No "second" is necessary, p. 35ff.
  4. Since your rules (FL's rules, more precisely) are not the same as Robert's rules, there isn't much we can do for you here at the Robert's Rules website. I suspect you had better consult with a Florida lawyer. One way out (possibly): what is your quorum requirement? If only the bare minimum of your 349 board members show up, the "majority of those present" might not be such a high hurdle. Depends on your quorum number, of course. You speak of Board members as "Delegates". But are you sure your bylaws or articles define a meeting of "Delegates" as a meeting of the Board? The two bodies are (commonly) not the same thing.
  5. Sounds out of order to me. Raise a point just as soon as someone acts upon the motion.
  6. Wait yourself, Kim! Those are the sorts of questions what would or could get clarified in any discussion about the merits of the point, following an appeal. We, here, have no idea what the point of order, &c., will entail -- anything else is pure guesswork. But a point of order has to be raised first to get things under way. That is the next parliamentary step.
  7. If the minutes correctly state what was brought up and passed, you just agree that the minutes are correct - even though the motion was, from what you say, out of order. But then you raise a point of order that the motion in question is indeed out of order, and the chair rules on your point. For details, and what can happen next, see RONR pages 247 and following. (Too much to even summarize here, by me anyway.)
  8. Is what in Robert's rules? (I can't tell what your "this" refers to.)
  9. Ah, right. I have got to stop trying to answer questions at 3:00 AM.
  10. Yes. Perhaps it is time to find a new treasurer who will do his job when the majority says to.
  11. Yes, it was valid, presuming your bylaws do not require a ballot vote. Even if the bylaw do require a ballot vote, since no one raised a point of order about the ballot requirement at the time of the election, the election is still valid.
  12. Yes, unless the members in the exec-sess authorize otherwise.
  13. Duplicate post.
  14. It is just a harmless (in my view) phrase denoting a higher threshold for the adoption of a measure than a "majority", which just means "more than half" (simple, or not). It is best to just state the higher threshold numerically as your bylaws do without bothering with any "super" business.
  15. Not required at all, per RONR. See p. 25, 371. But it is a good idea for the presiding officer to have a clear idea what's coming up (a "private" agenda, so to speak) so he/she can run things efficiently and look good in the process.