Tom Coronite

Do you mean to strikeout "waived" there? The resulting "...unless readings are by a two-thirds..." seems to be missing something.

Ah! I see. Thank you, Mr Martin, for clearing up my misunderstanding of what you were saying. I appreciate it.

While I certainly understand the explanation of why the "re-vote" was improper, if that's what they did, why would it not be recorded? Shouldn't the minutes reflect what was done, even if it was improper? And then let a point of order be raised, and record that? I am in complete agreement that the original vote should've stood. I'm just having a hard time ignoring the improper action they apparently did, in fact, do.

After reading Mr. Martin’s most excellent and thorough reply, I’m thinking my original reply came off as rather snarky. That was not my intent at all. I do apologize.

It might strike some as odd that an assembly would concern itself with the ins and outs of temporarily relinquishing the chair, while not being concerned with the principle that the required impartiality of the chair would suggest he not be seconding motions.

Still not entirely clear, because you’re not giving any info specifically about who is on this board. They’re elected for 3 yr terms. OK. But are those officers on this board? If they’re not members of the board (elected, appointed, ex officio, or somehow), and we’ve not yet been given any evidence that they are, they don’t vote at board meetings.

Your group can do almost anything if it wants to. You could even specify in your bylaws that the chair has authority to set an agenda. I’m fully confident no regular participants in this forum would recommend doing that, but since you asked, yes you could. Indeed, the better course of action, and more in line with what RONR suggests, is what Mr Brown and Mr Kapur have explained.

I’d say we are in agreement! 😁

How are those 30 members chosen? Do your bylaws address that? That will likely answer whether or not those officers you mention are members of the board. From what you posted, it’s not clear if they are.

Perhaps raising the issue as a motion under “New Business” would work, especially if no action has been taken to date. If you use an agenda, it’s not “set” until approved by the assembly.

What are you saying? That a motion was made that (accidentally, perhaps) complied with the requirements for a bylaw amendment, but just wasn’t identified specifically as a bylaw amendment? Is that what not using “standard approach” means?

In addition to the sections Mr. Kapur provided, see 50:24 which references committees keeping brief memoranda in the nature of minutes, for committee use.

Anyone can ask anyone else anything, but nobody can be compelled to vote. Your examples are of a small board, so under those rules, the chair can vote. The chair could also choose not to vote, if he’s so inclined.

When did this policy actually take effect? According to RONR, a motion takes effect upon its adoption, absent a rule or provision to the contrary. It’s not entirely clear from what you describe, but if a motion to adopt this policy wasn’t made until Jan 1, you may have your answer.

She tell you that herself? 9:27 speaks to the reading and approval of minutes of executive sessions. Hard to read/approve what doesn’t exist. 😉