Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Gary Novosielski

Members
  • Content count

    9,410
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Gary Novosielski

  • Rank
    Wonk
  • Birthday April 18

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Pennsylvania

Recent Profile Visitors

2,729 profile views
  1. Lifetime Membership

    Eliminating lifetime memberships seems to me to be preferable to actually eliminating lifetime members, especially with extreme prejudice.
  2. Interrupt Voting Process

    Yes and No. No, nothing is permitted to interrupt a vote once the first vote has been cast. The chair was completely wrong in doing so at all, let alone three times. But Yes, if nobody raises a point of order and just lets him do it, it can be done. It is the chair's responsibility to ensure that the rules are followed, but it is every member's responsibility as well--especially when the chair acts improperly. At this point, however, it's water under the bridge.
  3. Postpone to a Certain Time

    That's the method I'd recommend if it's not clear at the ouset whether a postponement would be proper. The assembly can set whatever deadline it wishes, even one beyond a quarterly interval, and instruct the committee to report then, or it can simply play it by ear based on how things develop.
  4. Adoption requires two-thirds vote...

    My interpretation would be that the threshold is not changed by that language, although that may have been the intent. The difference is between: a two-thirds vote of the <assembly>; and, a vote of two-thirds of the <assembly>. The first case, where the words "two thirds" and "vote" are together, matches RONR's term for a vote of two thirds of those present and voting; "of the assembly" . After looking at lots of similar language, I'm pretty comfortable saying that, but of course I'm not a member of your organization, and therefore my opinion has no weight. The second case cleary say that two thirds of the entire body must actually approve. We've also seen provisions that say "two-thirds of those present" without saying "and voting" which has the (unfortunate) effect of making an abstention the logical equivalent of a No vote. All that matters is how may Yes voters and how many present. The most unambiguous and probably most recommended language is simply to say "two-thirds vote". If you need to mention the body that is voting at all, put it in front, such as: "must be approved by the Membership by a two-thirds vote".
  5. Email vs regular mail

    No, "mail" means postal mail, unless otherwise specified. If the bylaws had said "in writing", without mentioning how, that would also mean postal mail or hand delivery, but could include e-mail or fax, but only for members who had agreed in advance to receive written material in other ways. If you want to authorize e-mail delivery in general for all members, your organization could pass a special rule of order.
  6. Tellers

    No, they don't even have to be members of the organization at all. You can name people off the street, or hire PriceWaterhouseCoopers to do the counting, without breaking any rules in RONR.
  7. Do your bylaws contain some provision that a single member can bring charges? If not, then a single member is not bringing charges, and you can freely ignore him. RONR's procedures require a vote by the assembly to bring charges. But RONR's rules do not apply if your bylaws contain specialized rules that would supersede those in RRONR. A complete description of RONR's discipline process is contained in Chapter XX (20) in RONR.
  8. What should be put in the minutes

    Is who correct--Gen. Robert? I hope so! Is one board member correct? No. Written rules (including those in the parliamentary authority (RONR), supersede custom. However, a majority of the board can decide to include whatever they wish--a single member cannot.
  9. Entering a motion to remove president

    Yes. It would be difficult for the president, when calling the meeting, to include in the call a description of the business to be considered, without knowing what that business is. The president does not simply agree to the meeting, but also calls the meeting. The actual distribution of the call is usually handled by the secretary, but the secretary is not the author of the content.
  10. Entering a motion to remove president

    But the disciplinary (if it truly is that) procedure for removing the president does not seem to involve formal procedures such as a trial and "sentencing". It is my understanding that only the board is involved.
  11. by law amendment and size of change

    Actually, a majority of 11 is 6.
  12. Addressing Chairman when Vice President Chairs

    Well, you know what they say about ASSUME. Or maybe you don't. I guess I just assumed you did. Oops, it's contagious! I probably should rethink this.
  13. by law amendment and size of change

    The vote requirements are the same whether you are completely rewriting the entire document, or simply inserting a comma.
  14. rigged.

    I fail to see how this could be characterized as "fixing" the election. It might be that you don't like the outcome, but there's nothing about this that violates any rule that I can see. If you don't feel the candidates will act properly, nominate and support someone who will.
  15. Entering a motion to remove president

    No, You can't. RONR says that special meetings can never be called, except as provided in the bylaws. This is not a case where the bylaws don't cover something. Your bylaws do cover special meetings, and the president is the only one given the power to call them. Other board members can only "request" that they be called, but something tells me that the president might not honor a request to call a meeting to remove the president. And since the call of a meeting must describe the business to be conducted, it's not possible to sneak in a meeting without stating the purpose.
×