Alexis Hunt

Members
  • Content count

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Alexis Hunt

  1. I agree with Mr. Honemann that the presumption must be that the minutes are correct, but a presumption is rebuttable. If there is evidence that contradicts the minutes, and indicates that a motion was indeed passed, then that evidence supersedes the minutes. Incorrect minutes are not a back door to reversing the decision duly made. Any officer who deliberately tries to do so, or who carries on insisting that the minutes are a more true record of what happened than the actual happenings, should probably be subject to discipline.
  2. If the committee chair is the one to move the motion, this is true, because a motion's mover may not speak against it. If, however, the committee chair reports the recommendation and another member moves to adopt it (which is not as ideal as Mr. Mervosh's advice, but may be necessary if, for instance, no other member of the committee is present), then the chair is free to speak against it.
  3. It may be that the original form of the motion is locked in, however (for instance, due to it having been sent out in a notice), but there is still opportunity for the Board to recommend an amendment from that form.
  4. Ah, yes. Whether or not absentee rights could affect the result does not matter. The same is true if notice is required but not provided. If one member is missing, even a unanimous election cannot get past a notice requirement.
  5. Quorum is, ultimately, a rule protecting absentees, so it falls under 1.
  6. I agree with this. Furthermore, if the executive board is meeting before the membership meeting, then the Board could consider adopting a motion recommending the amendment to the membership so that it is clear that the board agrees with this version.
  7. I'm not sure I agree. The Secretary is responsible for presenting a single version of the minutes to assembly, and this can subsequently be corrected. But there is no process for substitution of the minutes.
  8. We're possibly splitting hairs, but I suppose I'll clarify: A motion must not be phrased in such a way that adopting is a statement in favour of the status quo. In these examples, the motion actually has an effect if adopted, even though it's phrased in the negative.
  9. Unless the committee has authority (either on a standing basis or a one-off) to do so. If it's a committee of the membership and not the Board, moreover, the Board may not have any authority over it.
  10. Well, this one is straightforward at least. Your quoted language quite clearly refers to a fraction of the Board. The Board of Directors comprises its members, and empty chairs are not members. So you compute quorum based on the current number of members.
  11. Straying into bylaws interpretation, are we...
  12. I'm not aware of one. However, you may want to compare and contrast page 321 which explains the manner in which the motion to Reconsider does have a suspending effect, while there is nothing in section 35 about suspension of the motion to be rescinded.
  13. Mrs

    You do not need to ask for a vote or even unanimous consent for approving minutes. They are approved automatically once all corrections are dealt with.
  14. Also, in this case, the recission would only apply to the parts of the motion that haven't been carried out. It doesn't operate retroactively.
  15. No, never. A motion must always be phrased as a proposal to do something. If you make a motion "not to do X", and it is voted down, then did the assembly just agree to do X? If no member of the assembly wants to do X, then there is no motion required for that. If nobody moves that the assembly do X, then the assembly won't do X. In some cases, this may feel weird, such as if someone outside the assembly just made a presentation asking for money. In this case, though, the chair might go as far as saying "Is there a motion to award $X to Mr. Jingles?" but if nobody moves it, the assembly moves on to the next item of business. If members are split, then someone who is in favour of doing X should move it. Then the people opposed can argue against it. The only sort-of exception is in the case where there is a negative action which is different from doing nothing. For instance, if someone were applying to a position, then sending them a rejection letter is not doing nothing, so it would be in order to move to send them a rejection letter.