Search the Community

In a group that is led by an ineffective chair, a set of members properly called a special meeting. Later that day, a second group of members turn in a petition for another emergency meeting, setting their meeting time/date as exactly the same as the first called meeting. The chair decided to ask the body to vote on which agenda to use before calling the meeting to order. Chaos erupted for obvious reasons. After 15 minutes passed of inactivity, the group who signed the petition started the meeting and elected a presiding chair for that meeting. It seems obvious that the first meeting should have been called first, and then the second meeting should have been called, if its agenda was not moot. However, it would be nice if there was some actual rule that addressed this (beyond the "there's one meeting" rule). (For those who might ask - the difference in the two agendas was mostly that the second agenda allowed for online participation by Zoom. The chair and minority group wanted to bring in a couple dozen inactive members who were not going to come to the meeting, but would happily support the chair if he made it easy.)

During annual elections, does a member need to be present in order to be voted into a position? In December, a member who had previously accepted the nomination, for the position of secretary, was unable to make the meeting because of her obligations with her son. One of the elders said that she was not eligible to take the position because she was not there. The position was given to a last minute nominee else. Now there is distrust and skepticism among the membership. Thanks for your help

The Executive Board of a local committee has a rather reluctant chairman who cancels any (Exec Board) meetings when anyone, other than himself, requests one. I cannot find any reference as to who may call a meeting anywhere in the committee's bylaws, its plan of organization or RROR. I'm hoping to cite a specific section in Robert's (if one exists) since I'm anticipating further pushback from the chairman. Thanks in advance. George

When is someone considered to have attended a meeting? Our bylaws state that someone becomes an active member upon attending 3 consecutive meetings. Active members may vote in elections. The question has come up as to whether the third meeting can be the one at which the vote is taken. Stated differently, would someone be considered to have attended a meeting upon arrival at the meeting, and thereby be considered an active member at the time of arrival or would they be considered to have attended a meeting upon the completion of the meeting?

Stated meetings have started at 6 p.m. for several years. Now a member wants to change the meeting to 4 p.m. If the majority vote to change the meeting time, is it legal to do so if other member's work hours will prevent them from coming to the meetings?

On the first session (and first meeting), resolutions were to be dealt with. Four were approved, one was postponed indefinitely, and seven were postponed until a certain committee was present. Does the next meeing (or session) start with the postponed seven resolutions, or do they start with the new agenda before the seven resolutions? Note, the charter is nearly completely devoid of meeting procedures.

Should we be including an open discussion in our meeting without a motion out? I have yet to see a requirement for open business after new business, but a member of our organization is adamant we are wrong and it is required.