Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Shmuel Gerber

Administrators
  • Posts

    4,475
  • Joined

Everything posted by Shmuel Gerber

  1. I doubt that this provision relates to amendments adopted by the board. We are not here to interpret statutes, but I get the sense that this issue has been raised in the past and that we are continually retreading the same ground.
  2. So far, all we know is that the quorum requirement is "more than 2/3 attendees". That's not exactly a lot to go on. I guess we also need to know whether or not in this board "fractional persons" exist. 🙂 This logic is almost unassailable, yet everyone here (including me) seems to think it is probably wrong in this case.
  3. 9:6 "Each regular meeting normally completes a separate session, as explained in 8:4 (see Adjourned Meeting, 9:17–19 below, however). Some societies have frequent meetings for social or cultural purposes at which business may be transacted, and also hold a session every month or quarter especially for business. In such societies, the term regular meeting applies particularly to the regular business session."
  4. Yes, I misread that part. So for purposes of this election, is this person, in fact, a "voting member?" That's an interesting question. I don't see why it would be unfair to allow such delegates to vote in the election, unless the votes are secret and there is some concern that the delegate will disregard the instructions from the members. Another approach is to provide for alternates at the convention, which is a typical bylaw provision anyway. Such a provision could also include the possibility of the delegate reclaiming his seat from the alternate some time after having excused himself from acting as a delegate (which he could do after the election is conducted).
  5. Your bylaws take precedence over RONR. So, what would be more correct is to go according to the existing bylaws, unless and until the relevant provisions are amended to say something else. A quorum depends on the number of voting members present. I don't think the fact that, in a particular scenario under your bylaws, a certain member is restricted in casting a vote for himself, would prevent him from being counted toward the quorum.
  6. That depends on what the bylaws say regarding amendments.
  7. The bylaws in question do not require previous notice and require a 2/3 vote to amend. In the 7th and 8th editions of RONR, this paragraph began with "No amendment is in order that increases the modification of the article or rule to be amended." In the 9th edition, this became "Unless the bylaws permit their amendment without previous notice (which they should not do), no amendment is in order that increases the modification of the article or rule to be amended." That was clearly an improvement over the previous editions, but it didn't directly address the possibility of considering a bylaw amendment under the default rules in RONR when no notice is required but notice was given, in which case the ability to adopt amendments to the pending bylaw amendment that goes outside the scope of the notice depends on whether a majority of the entire membership is present. In the 10th edition, the text was changed to what it still currently says in the 12th edition. I agree that it can cause confusion, and so can what is said in 35:4.
  8. A motion should be made and adopted to appoint a committee to revise the bylaws. When the committee is done with its work, the secretary of the organization should include notice of the proposed revision with the call of the meeting at which it is expected that the revision will be considered. At the meeting, the committee chair would move "to amend the bylaws by substituting for the existing bylaws the committee's proposed revision as given with the notice of this meeting."
  9. If the governing documents give alternates that right (even when not acting as voting members), then yes. Otherwise, no.
  10. Robert's Rules also says that financial assessments cannot be imposed on members except as provided in the bylaws.
  11. Yes, in that case the alternate is essentially a guest and would have only such rights as are granted in the bylaws or equivalent governing document.
  12. Questions regarding the application of a statute should be directed to legal counsel. As far as Robert's Rules is concerned, non-board members do not have any rights with respect to notice of or participation in meetings of the board or its committees.
  13. It goes into effect the moment the chair declares that it has been adopted.
  14. It seems inappropriate to me to specifically allow the member with a conflict of interest to preside. "47:10 Whenever a motion is made that refers only to the presiding officer in a capacity not shared in common with other members, or that commends or censures him with others, he should turn the chair over to the vice-president or appropriate temporary occupant (see below) during the assembly’s consideration of that motion, just as he would in a case where he wishes to take part in debate (see also 43:29–30). The chair, however, should not hesitate to put the question on a motion to elect officers or appoint delegates or a committee even if he is included."
  15. Somebody was way ahead of me on this one. https://legalkeyboards.com/products/legalboard
  16. RONR, 12th ed, Sec.57 Good (next) morning, everyone. Mr. Honemann, we've got to get you a Deluxe Edition keyboard so you can press the official “§” button. 🙂
  17. You mean other than flogging the members of the programs committee on the Regional Executive Board?
  18. To clarify, by "questions raised later," I mean questions raised after the member who made the motion has yielded the floor after his speech in debate, but still while the pending motion is being debated (or at least before the motion has been put to a vote).
  19. I understand that, which is why I'm recommending that you start by reading the official In Brief guide. In my opinion, that is a better way to get a handle on the basics than by attempting to get one question answered at a time in this forum — although you are welcome to try. In Robert's Rules, there is no such category as "old business." If an item of new business is postponed or formally carried over from one meeting to the next, it is considered under unfinished business or general orders. If it is not formally carried over, then the assembly is finished with it, but it can be brought up again at another meeting as new. A member should think about what it is that he or she wants done — preferably before the meeting and in consultation with some other members — with enough clarity to make a proposal in the form of a motion. The member should make the motion at the meeting (after seeking and obtaining recognition from the chair) and pass a written copy to the chair, or submit a written copy to the secretary before the meeting. Before the member makes the motion, there should not be any debate, although the chair may guide some some brief discussion to come up with a properly worded motion. After the chair restates the member's motion, the member is entitled to first preference in obtaining the floor, at which point he or she can explain the motion and speak in favor it. During this speech, the member may consent to be interrupted for questions while speaking. The chair can also allow the member to respond to factual questions raised later, but the member who made the motion is not entitled to enter again into debate until after every other member who wishes to speak in debate has had the opportunity to do so. If Robert's Rules has been adopted, then at some point the members must have been convinced that it should be followed. If you are the president, you already were given the job of following those rules and you should not first try to convince the rest of the members of anything other than what the rules actually say. You do not need to make reference to improper procedures of the past, but simply explain what the correct procedure is.
  20. Robert's Rules does not mandate separate minutes of executive sessions.
  21. Well, at least at the national level, I think there is still great respect shown for following the rules of order. For example, when a Democratic congressman recently wanted to interrupt a vote that wouldn't go his way, he knew better than to make a ruckus on the floor of the House. Instead, he pulled a fire alarm outside the chamber.
  22. No. If you want to learn how a meeting is supposed to be conducted, you really ought to at least get a copy of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised In Brief and read it. Then you should come here to ask questions about anything you find confusing, or difficult to apply to a particular situation. First of all, a meeting does not need to have an agenda, as Robert's Rules contains a standard order of business that is adequate for the regular meetings of most organizations. Second, there are often reports from officers, boards, and committees, which may contain explanations and recommendations regarding particular items of business. At the appropriate point in the order of business (or as provided for on an agenda of a particular meeting), these reports may be delivered by the reporting officer or member without any motion first having been made on the subject. If any action is to be taken following such reports, or at the initiative of a member without a report having been given, then a motion to take the particular action should be made — not a motion to discuss the item. After the motion is made (and seconded if required), debate is had on whether or not to take the action proposed by the motion. Finally, when the debate has ended, the motion is voted on by the assembly.
×
×
  • Create New...