George Mervosh

Members
  • Content count

    5,601
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About George Mervosh

  • Rank
    Professional Registered Parliamentarian

Profile Information

  • Location
    Pittsburgh PA
  • Interests
    www.smoothermeetings.com

Recent Profile Visitors

2,032 profile views
  1. Yes, I think I would. Harm to the rights of members or things which could give rise to a continuing breach are my red lines no matter which hat I'm wearing at a meeting.
  2. I think they are important. The exact parliamentary situation at the time would tell me if it's the right thing to do.
  3. There is no requirement for board impartiality in RONR. Many times a board will offer recommendations in their reports to the members. During actual debate on a pending motion there is no collective statement permitted since it's only one member at a time debating, but they certainly could have adopted a motion in advance of the meeting which stated their opinion on the matter.
  4. Yeah, I bet that is a mood killer.
  5. Nominations are debatable. RONR (11th ed.), tinted pp. 18-19, motion 49. The normal rules of decorum and debate apply. Just as with other motions a member need not offer any remarks when nominating someone.
  6. it's likely the motion to lay on the table was misused. See http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#12 and FAQ#13 that immediately follows it. if more than one meeting (session) has elapsed since it was laid on the table or if your meetings are held less often than a quarterly time interval, it's dead - all of it. Just make whatever motion you want anew. If these are bylaw amendments, follow that process to amend them anew.
  7. In my opinion, no. I think what you want to do does go beyond prefacing a motion with a few words. You're advocating for it's adoption and providing the reasoning. I think that stretches the rule too far.
  8. You're referring to this passage, it seems - "If an actual minority in a representative meeting makes improper use of this motion by moving to reconsider and enter on the minutes a vote which requires action before the next regular meeting, the remedy is to fix the time for an adjourned meeting (9, 22) on another suitable day when the reconsideration can be called up and disposed of. In such a case, the mere making of a motion to set an adjourned meeting would likely cause withdrawal of the motion to Reconsider and Enter on the Minutes, since its object would be defeated. " RONR (11th ed.), p. 335 Given your posting I'd suggest saying all of that prior to making the motion is improper. Since it's likely the motion will be made when no other business is pending you should just save it for debate, assuming that the motion to reconsider and enter on the minutes is not withdrawn..
  9. No rule in RONR prohibits it.
  10. Maybe the unruly member really is unnameable.
  11. And if the President voted right along with everyone else and it ended in a tie vote, he cannot vote again to break a tie. The motion would simply be defeated or if it's an election, additional rounds of voting may be necessary.
  12. See http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#9 and it would really be best if he had a couple of friends make and second the motion.
  13. Well whatever you think is a big problem with the nomination process is now rather small. The above quoted action is completely improper and it's possible your officers' terms have expired and you have no officers. Now that's a big problem.
  14. I don't think a motion to make the entire building non-smoking conflicts with your cited rule.