Leo

An annual election is conducted using a combination of electronic ballots and USPS ballots as prescribed by the bylaws. The ballots are sent to members 60 days before the annual meeting and must be received or postmarked 30 days before the annual meeting. What is the status of an individual whose membership in the organization ends in the interim between the mailing and the tellers tallying of the ballots?

Thank you George. This will help those studying for the RP exam.

Thank you George. This will help with those studying for the RP exam.

I believe the statements on pages 66 & 126, lead to the following. If the motion stated above is immediately pending, the motion to postpone indefinitely is the subsidiary motion. If the motion stated above is not pending the motion to postpone indefinitely cannot be made. Therefore, the motion to postpone indefinitely cannot be made without a main motion immediately pending.

Thank you Dan. A questions related to postpone indefinitely is in the In Order Study Guide for the NAP Registration Examination, part II, question 14. I was working with a group studying for the exam and could not think of an example.

On page 66, under incidental main motions corresponding to subsidiary motions, for each of the subsidiary motions except the previous question and lay on the table, there is a corresponding incidental main motion of the same name that can be made when no other motion is pending. On page 126, under standard descriptive characteristics 2, postpone indefinitely can can be made only while a main question is immediately pending. How are these two apparently contradictory statements be reconciled? Can someone give an example of the motion to postpone indefinitely as an incidental motion?

The concern was about the rank of a proviso. Since a proviso is not one of the bylaws being adopted and it is not a special rule of order for a meeting what is its rank. The answer from Mr. Honemann indicates the proviso has the rank of a bylaw when dealing with ballots and cannot be suspended.

If a proviso related to a bylaw revision states, "The election of officers and directors at this annual meeting shall be by ballot" and there is only on nominee for a particular office, must the ballot vote be conduct or can the one nominee for this particular office be declared elected? The revised bylaws do not require the vote by ballot at the annual meetings.

My mistake. The bylaws state the amendments take effect at the close of the meeting at which they are amended.

The bylaws state that amendments take effect at the close of the annual meeting. A bylaw revision is considered and adopted without the requirement that amendments take effect at the close of the annual meeting. 1 Do the revised bylaws take effect immediately as prescribed by RONR? or 2 Do the revised bylaws take effect at the close of the annual meeting as prescribed by the previous bylaws? and if the answer to 2 is yes 3 Can a proviso be adopted before the consideration of the bylaw revision stating that the revised bylaws if adopted take effect immediately?

The bylaws state, "The _____ committee shall be composed of eight member. The two directors, the chair of the budget committee, and one member elected from each of their five respective units." Some units are not able to elected members to the committee because no member is willing to accept their unit's nomination or election. At a committee meeting is the quorum based on the eight members prescribed by the bylaws? Or At a committee meeting is the quorum based on the three members stated plus the number of member elected by their respective units?

If the bylaws require a vote by ballot the rule cannot be suspended. If the bylaws require their be a separate ballot for each office, would that be in the nature of a rule of order that could be suspended to allow for all offices on one ballot/

If the bylaws set a condition and a penalty for not observing the condition, can the board adopt a rule adding to the conditions? For example The bylaws state a director who misses three meeting in a year is removed from the board. Can the board adopt a rule indicating lateness is also a cause for dismissal?

I don't know. I just didi a cut and paste from a word file and it turned up as it is.

Wouldn't: 1) the election of a secretary pro tem, 2) the motion to call the roll, and 3) the motion to obtain quorum constitute an agenda?

The original poster, Leo, that's me, was asking for a citation to support a required majority vote to allow proceedings to continue when the point is referred to the assembly because the chair is in doubt.. Daniel Honemann gave the citation on page 400, lines 5–7. Thank you!

Page 105, lines 8–12 “It is preferable to avoid a motion containing a negative statement even in cases where the effect ofthe motion is to propose that something be done, since members may become confused as to the effectof voting for or against such a motion.” A similar statement is made on page 105, lines 8–12, and both statements address the issue of putting the question so the affirmative vote will favor allowing the proceedings or allowing that something be done. Neither statement gives the required vote that is typically given in the 7thStandard Descriptive Characteristic. I believe that an affirmative vote of a majority is required to allowing the proceedings to continue as if the point had not been raised. But, in this case the 7thcharacteristic, unlike others, does not give the vote required, and I can find no other citations that actually give the affirmative vote required to allow the proceedings to continue.

Point of order In cases where the chair, being in doubt, refers the point of order to the judgment of the assembly, the required vote is not prescribed by standard descriptive characteristic 7. 7 Is normally ruled upon by the chair. No vote is taken unless the chair is in doubt or his ruling is appealed. Where is the required vote given for determining if the point is well taken or not well taken when referred to the judgment of the assembly?

A general statement or rule is always of less authority than a specific statement or rule and yields to it. Since the special rule of order makes a general statement about a speaker’s duration and number of times doesn’t it yield to the specific statement concerning a speaker’s number of times in and appeal?

An organization adopts a special rule of order limiting debate to two minutes per speaker and twice to the same question on the same day. The adopted rule limiting debate to two minutes per speaker supersedes the general rule that a member an speak no longer than ten minutes. Does the adopted rule that a member can speak twice to the same question on the same day supersede the specific rule that in the case of an appeal only the presiding officer can speak twice, all other members being limited to one speech.

Thank you. I figured it was not the best idea but wanted to give it a try. The notice went out and the deadline has passed. I asked the question too late.

A notice is given of a special meeting before the next regular monthly meeting. It is important that certain records involving other organizations, such as the post office and the bank, be updated as soon as possible. Although a special meeting does not normally approve the minutes of the previous regular monthly meeting, would it be in order at the special meeting to suspend the rules and adopt the minutes of the previous regular monthly meeting.

The board is subject to the annual meeting at which the budget was adopted as presented and the motion to adopt is silent on any conditions concerning the board's amending the budget or handling any unforeseen evens. If the office roof starts leaking seriously, or the organization runs into technical difficulties and needs legal assistance, what recourse does the board have? Is "any other spending prohibited"?

What about this. A bylaw states, “The board is subject to the delegates at the annual meeting." The delegates at the annual meeting adopted the “fixed” budget as presented without amendment and with no additional wording addressing the board’s amending the budget, or authorizing expenditures not included in the budget, or reallocating funds in the budget. A later bylaw, the one previously quoted states, “Matters affecting the policies and means of accomplishing the objectives of the organization not otherwise provided for in the bylaws shall be vested in the board” It seems to me the later bylaw negates the whole idea of the board’s being subject to the delegates at the annual meeting as stated by the first bylaw. If this is the case, there is no reason for the delegates to adopt the budget that was prepared by the finance committee and presented at the annual meeting; and in addition, there is no reason for the delegates to adopt any motion at the annual meeting since the later bylaw seems to allow the board to rescind or amend something previously adopted by the delegates.