Josh Martin

Members
  • Content count

    11,437
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Josh Martin

  • Rank
    Professional Registered Parliamentarian
  • Birthday 09/05/1986

Profile Information

  • Location
    Minneapolis, MN
  • Interests
    reading, writing, video games, parliamentary procedure

Recent Profile Visitors

1,459 profile views
  1. The President may rule a motion adopted by the board out of order, if the motion conflicts with some rule, although such a ruling is subject to appeal. He may not simply overrule a board decision because he disagrees with it, unless the bylaws grant the President such unusual authority.
  2. mr

    It could be either. A parliamentary inquiry is a question about parliamentary procedure, while a Point of Order is a statement that a rule has been violated, which forces the chair to rule on the point. So a member might ask, "Mr. Chairman, is the member's amendment germane to the resolution?" This would be in the nature of a parliamentary inquiry. On the other hand, the member might say, "Point of Order! The member's amendment is not germane to the resolution." This would be in the nature of a Point of Order.
  3. So far as RONR is concerned, the only members who count toward the quorum are members who are actually present. If your organization's rules provide otherwise, it is up to your organization to interpret those rules.
  4. It is in order for the board to do this.
  5. What kind of meeting are you talking about? If you have a board which consists of these five officers (and no one else), then three of them need to be present for a quorum. Even without a quorum, you can still have an official meeting, you just can't conduct any business. On the other hand, if you're talking about a meeting of the membership, you don't need any of the officers to be present. So long as there is a quorum, a meeting could be held and business conducted even if all of the officers were absent. The society could elect a Chairman Pro Tempore and a Secretary Pro Tempore and hold the meeting.
  6. It's your organization that is making a sham of this, not Robert's Rules. As has been stated several times, RONR's position is that the minutes should simply say that the motion was adopted.
  7. It seems extremely unlikely that the bylaws (or applicable law) grant a single individual the authority to create additional qualifications for office.
  8. Do you mean to say that they use plurality voting? Preferential voting is "ranked voting." A majority vote is still required. Well, apparently they have not adopted RONR or any parliamentary authority so they can do things like use plurality voting for the election of officers with simply a custom.
  9. It is certainly correct that, in the long term, the bylaws should be amended to remove the ambiguity, but until that occurs, the board (and ultimately, the membership) must interpret the provision as best as it can. It is not proper to simply ignore the bylaws because they are unclear. If it is correct that the bylaws require an election by the membership to fill the vacancy, then that is what must occur, and the board's election is null and void.
  10. If the motion is, in fact, contrary to the board bylaws, then it is null and void.
  11. It strains belief that the bylaws are "entirely silent" regarding the powers of the board, but in such a case, all motions adopted by the membership are fully binding upon the board, and the board has no authority to do anything without direction from the membership, unless something in a higher-level rule (such as applicable law) provides otherwise. The bylaws will generally say something about the powers of the board, however vague that statement might be. RONR does say that in stock corporations, the board is the supreme authority, and the membership just gets the powers the bylaws assign them. Motions adopted by the members would just be recommendations. For all other organizations, the situation is reversed - the membership is the supreme authority, and the board only has such powers as the bylaws assign to it. The fact that the assembly and the board are "creatures of legislation" doesn't change anything so far as RONR is concerned, but the legislation in question may have its own rules on the subject, and such rules would take precedence.
  12. I think it is correct that simply notifying members that a general revision to the bylaws shall be proposed is not sufficient notice, but it may still be possible to act upon the proposed revision at the February meeting. The bylaws committee, after completing its work, could ask the Secretary to include the required notice in the call of the meeting.
  13. A member could give notice that he intends to make the motion anew, provided that the original motion is withdrawn.
  14. An incomplete election can result in a vacancy. A vacancy is whenever there is no one in an office. Depending on how the bylaws are worded, an incomplete election may have that effect. Nonetheless, I agree that there is no contradiction. The assembly is not beginning a new election, it is completing an election which has already begun, and for which there is already some form of notice - either notice to fill a vacancy or the fact that the bylaws specify when the regular elections shall be held. In much the same way, the fact that notice is required for a special meeting does not mean notice is required for an adjourned meeting, and the fact that previous notice is required for certain motions does not mean notice must be given again if that motion is postponed.
  15. At least so far as RONR is concerned, I do not think it is proper to open nominations from the floor at a board meeting when the election is conducted by the general membership. It would be proper to take such nominations from the floor at a meeting of the general membership, if such a meeting takes place prior to the vote. With that said, it appears that the organization's rules require the nominating committee to submit its nominations to the board before mailing them to the members. There is presumably some reason for this requirement, and that reason might be to permit the board members to make additional nominations. This is, however, a question of interpreting your organization's rules, which is up to your organization.