Daniel H. Honemann

Members
  • Content count

    6,179
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

About Daniel H. Honemann

Profile Information

  • Location
    Timonium, Maryland

Recent Profile Visitors

3,147 profile views
  1. In circumstances such as those referred to in your initial post, I think you should make an effort to ensure that the rules are adhered to, since you are obviously not referring to situations such as those described on page 250, lines 11-15, in which "it is clear that no one's rights are being infringed upon and no real harm is being done to the proper transaction of business." I say this not because I think there is something in RONR which specifically imposes a duty upon you to do so, but because it's the right thing to do, and I think we all have a duty to do the right thing.
  2. One wonders what is meant by "the motion included 4 amendments".
  3. This is not at all unusual. Members will often vote in elections for less than all of the offices being voted on.
  4. As previously stated, the rule in RONR appears to be that nothing in Articles of Incorporation can be suspended unless the Articles themselves so provide, and therefore, as a general rule, such articles should contain only what is necessary to obtain their acceptance. (RONR, 11th ed., pp. 11-12). If this rule is deemed to be applicable to your situation, then I would think that no nominations can be taken from the floor. However, from what you have posted, it appears that your Articles of Incorporation are designed to contain virtually all of he rules which would, here in the United States, ordinarily be contained in bylaws, raising some doubt about the applicability of what RONR says in this connection. As a consequence, I am unable to give you an answer to your question in which I can have any confidence. I suppose if an effort is made during your next meeting to reopen nominations, this question will have to be resolved by your congregation's assembly through the point of order, ruling, and appeal process outlined in Sections 23 and 24 in RONR. I think it is also of significance to note that nothing you have posted from your governing documents indicates that write-in votes during your ballot elections are prohibited.
  5. Written committee reports that have not as yet been presented to the assembly during a regular or properly called meeting at which a quorum is present have no official status, and so there are no rules in RONR pertaining to their disposition by the Secretary or distribution to members prior to their having been formally presented. I suppose that common sense would dictate that the secretary retain them in some fashion, and not simply discard them, but that they shouldn't be distributed to members unless your organization has some rule or custom calling for advance distribution to members of such draft reports.
  6. I agree with Mr. Novosielski that, if the chair assumes a motion under appropriate circumstances, no second is required.
  7. It should be included in the minutes only if the assembly orders it, which can be done by majority vote.
  8. I think it more accurate (at least in my state) to say that Articles of Incorporation are "filed with" (not "issued from") the state. It's the state's acceptance of the Articles of Incorporation for recordation which makes the proposed corporation a legally constituted body corporate. Actually, the rule in RONR appears to be that nothing in Articles of Incorporation can be suspended by the organization itself unless the Articles themselves so provide, and therefore, as a general rule, should contain only what is necessary to obtain their acceptance. (RONR, 11th ed., pp. 11-12). However, from what has been posted, it appears that Articles of Incorporation in Germany are designed to contain virtually all of he rules which would, here in the United States, ordinarily be contained in bylaws, raising some doubt about the applicability of what RONR says in this connection.
  9. Pastor, you leave us wondering whether or not your church's Articles of Incorporation contain a provision which adopts RONR as its parliamentary authority, and if so, exactly what it says. I do note, however, that it hasn't paid much attention to RONR's admonition that an organization should never adopt a rule permitting absentee ballots to be counted along with the ballots cast by persons in attendance at the meeting at which the vote is taken (RONR, 11th ed., p. 423), but it's not the only organization which has made this mistake.
  10. He can move, during a meeting, that the meeting go into executive session. "A meeting enters into executive session only when required by rule or established custom, or upon the adoption of a motion to do so. A motion to go into executive session is a question of privilege (19), and therefore is adopted by a majority vote." (RONR, 11th ed., p. 95)
  11. The rule alluded to is one which says that, if the rules allow nonmembers to speak on an agenda item, they cannot speak on any substitute motion made for that agenda item. The observation (in the footnote on p. 263 of RONR, 11th ed.) that rules may be suspended to allow nonmembers to speak in debate doesn't seem to even come close.
  12. Well, now you know why it was probably a bad idea to adopt a rule which makes your (immediate?) "Past President" automatically a member of your board. RONR offers no advice in this connection.
  13. I don't see why not, provided that the person who nominated him has not withdrawn his nomination, and provided that, under your customized rules, declination of a nomination does not automatically result in the withdrawal of that nomination. I would think so.
  14. But a practice which is simply followed as a matter of established custom, and which has not been formally adopted by the assembly, is not a "standing rule" as defined in RONR. It is merely a "custom".
  15. Well, I'm quite sure I would have told them the same thing.