Rev Ed

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Rev Ed

  • Birthday August 19

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

623 profile views
  1. Regardless, a regular meeting must be known to the Board member - either through specific notice (i.e. a letter or e-mail being sent out to all members of the Board) or through a By-law stating when regular meetings will be held (i.e. "The Board shall meet monthly on the third Tuesday of the month at 7 p.m. in Board Room.") So you cannot hold a regular meeting without the board member knowing about it. Of course, that does not necessarily mean that specific items must be disclosed in the notice - or sent out at all. For special meetings, all board members must be informed and can only be called if the By-laws specifically allow for it. And only issues specified in the call for the meeting can be discussed and/or vote upon.
  2. SaintCad - I know of several organizations where the By-laws have included a statement that if a Board member misses three meetings within a calendar year without a reason that the Board can declare the position vacant. So if the member leaves for three months after stating "I quit", the Board could declare the position vacant regardless. So even under your situation, the person could win on appeal only to still be removed from office.
  3. Based on the information provided, the Vice President has withdrawn he resignation and as such will continue as Vice President.
  4. Normally, the President would chair the meeting, then the Vice President. If neither are present, then the Secretary should call the meeting to order to elect a Chair pro tem. As none of the above are present, then any member may call the meeting to order and hold an election for a Chair pro tem. Once a President is elected, he/she would take over as Chair. P.S. A Chair pro tem is a temporary Chair who chairs a meeting until the normal Chair (i.e. the President) or a Vice President arrives or is elected.
  5. There can be as many Vice President's as the organization wants - just like there can be as many directors as the organization wants. Each organization is going to be different. For example, for a For-Profit organization (i.e. a company who is out to make money like a bank or large retail organization), the organization may have more than one Vice President heading up each department/section of the organization (i.e. Vice President of Finance, Vice President of Human Resources, Vice President of Marketing, Vice President of Sales, etc.) For a Not-For Profit I'd keep it to a small number of Vice Presidents. Perhaps one - but no more than three, depending on the size of the organization. You may have a for each major area of the organization, such as a Vice President of Fundraising, but the By-laws should state how each Vice President will rank in succession for the Presidency. For example, in such a case I have advised ranking the Vice Presidents according to seniority. The longer the person has been a Vice President, then the closer they are to take over the Presidency in the case of the Presidency becoming vacant due to death, resignation, or removal from office.
  6. Nope. First you vote on the original motion, and if against it vote against it. Then make a motion to do the opposite. To take up on Bruce's example above: first you vote on the motion to commend something, and then if it defeated you are free to make a motion to censure.
  7. It all depends on what any statute covering your organization says. Legislation may require an audit. But as far as RONR is concerned the By-laws can contain whatever the members want them to say.
  8. Also, as the assembly has the ultimate final decision, if the Chairman starts denying the right of the assembly to make a final decision on the issue, the assembly could move to have the Chairman removed as the Chair of the meeting. Plus, further disciplinary action could be taken, if required.
  9. I'd go with the membership - its their Minutes of their meeting. But I remember something about the Board, or another group doing so because of the time interval. Someone else will give you a more concrete response.
  10. Another example would be if the Board (for example) normally takes a recess roughly halfway through the meeting. A motion could be made to "Not take a recess during the meeting."
  11. Then what do you call corrections? You do not vote on the Minutes themselves, but on the corrections offered. As such, if necessary, another member could offer a completely different set of Minutes by way of moving to correct the Minutes with a new set of Minutes. Something along the lines of "I move that the Minutes be corrected through the draft version offered by Joe Smith." Someone else will likely provide a more accurate motion.
  12. I have a quick question. I know that a By-law which creates a rule of order can be suspended, just like any other rule of order, however would the organization, when creating such a By-law (or series of By-laws) could not add a statement that "Any Rules of Order found in theses By-laws cannot be suspended." I do not see a reason why this would not be allowed, especially as the By-laws would supersede anything found in RONR (in this case the rule about suspending rules of order.) I am thinking that any such statement would be acceptable, but I thought that I would ask for feedback. Thanks for any feedback.
  13. I have to disagree - the group's own rules specifically state that the motion must be postponed until the next regular meeting. If the next regular meeting following the May meeting is in September, then that is the 'next regular meeting', and the group's own rules supersede RONR.
  14. Of course, unless the assembly has the power to compel its members to attend, there is little that the Chairman, or any member/person present, can do to force quorum to be met. Phone calls, recesses, etc. are all nice - but how long do you wait. The end result in most cases is that the meeting will be adjourned. I see nothing wrong with the Chairman calling the meeting to order, declaring that there is no quorum and adjourning the meeting unless someone insists on waiting. Of course, those in attendance are free to wait around talking amongst themselves. But why not simply make it official that the meeting is over.
  15. Well then the Executive Committee members could always take office immediately upon election. This will likely require a By-law amendment for the organization, or some other change in how the organization is operated, but that would also fix the solution. Otherwise, the current members of the Executive Committee would make the appointments.