George Mervosh

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About George Mervosh

  • Rank
    Professional Registered Parliamentarian

Profile Information

  • Location
    Pittsburgh PA
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

2,021 profile views
  1. 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.
  2. it's likely the motion to lay on the table was misused. See 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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is pending you should just save it for debate, assuming that the motion to reconsider and enter on the minutes is not withdrawn..
  5. Maybe the unruly member really is unnameable.
  6. 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.
  7. See and it would really be best if he had a couple of friends make and second the motion.
  8. 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.
  9. I don't think a motion to make the entire building non-smoking conflicts with your cited rule.
  10. The adoption of a standing rule, such as this, requires a majority vote to adopt. RONR (11th ed.), p. 18
  11. She read nothing of the sort, at least in RONR.
  12. Then Mr. Honemann's answer still stands. Time to move on.
  13. I got the impression these questions/comments/speeches, whatever, occured when the report is concluded. When the officer concludes his report and simply sits down, are questions asked after that really related to the "business at hand', or is it when the presiding officer moves on to the next report or other item of business that they become unrelated to the business at hand?