Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

J. J.

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About J. J.

  • Birthday 01/01/1963

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Interests
    Procedure, History, Politics, Genealogy, a Missing Person Case in Central Pennsylvania, and, of course, Donna Summer.

Recent Profile Visitors

1,137 profile views
  1. Empty Ballot

    Even in this case, I think nominations could be reopened by a majority vote. If the bylaws, "Nominations from the floor shall be made at the October meeting," that would not preclude reopening nominations at the November meeting by a majority. If after the bylaws said, after that, "There shall be no additional nominations after the October meeting," then you would be talking about suspending the rules.
  2. Minutes of the meeting

    The next meeting, if it within the quarterly time interval. In the future, please stat a new topic.
  3. Not Voting vs Abstaining

    I'm suggest that you read “34 Noes, 1 Doubtful, 4 Ayes”, Parliamentary Journal, April 2001, where a quite similar was discussed.
  4. Well, in fairness, if the chair would refuse to call a meeting to order, the vice president could act. That would be within the meeting context, however. I'd go with disciplinary action.
  5. Looking at precedent from the US House, the person could be nominated. There are several examples of someone being ineligible when nominated/elected, but seated when meeting the eligibility requirement.
  6. Emergency

    The general members can fill the vacancies.
  7. The appointing power can generally remove the committee member. He need not be "barred." He could be removed as a committee member.
  8. Emergency

    Who elects the board members?
  9. Emergency

    What do the bylaws say about filing vacancies? What do they say is the quorum of the board.
  10. Adding to this, the vice president has a right to vote for himself for office (pp. 407-08). This is similar enough (and a duty of vice president) that the vice president is not in a "should abstain" position.
  11. It may be, and probably is, desirable, but it may not be immediate enough. The motion can properly be placed before the assembly, and disposed of, by the majority a bit easier than removal or suspension of the presiding officer. I will note two other possibilities: 1. As noted, the might be out of order on other grounds, and the majority may agree with those grounds. 2. The majority might agree that the motion is not dilatory, but might oppose the motion.
  12. Changing a Vote by Ballot

    Except to exempt a signed ballot, where the identity of the voter is known, I agree. Once the ballot is cast, there is no way to know how the person voted.
  13. "No motion is dilatory that the assembly chooses to entertains (no matter how dilatory it really is)." The assembly gets to make the decision, even if it has to appeal the decision of the the chair, and even when that appeal has to to out by a member from the floor. I would not rule the motion dilatory, nor would I oppose the appeal of the chair's decision that it was. This is something in the control the majority. The motion "That the XXXXXX Executive Committee requests the President of XXXXXXX respect the expressed wishes of Council and delegate XXX authority to chair the next council meeting to a parliamentarian or other appropriately qualified speaker," may, however, be out of order on other grounds.
  14. "No motion is dilatory that the assembly chooses to entertain (no matter how dilatory it really is)." Basically, it is ultimately up to the majority to determine if a motion is dilatory. If a member should appeal the decision of the chair, including putting the motion from the floor, and the majority agree to entertain the motion, the motion is properly before the assembly. By definition, that motion is not dilatory. The chair should, if he feels the motion is dilatory, rule it out of order as such, and prepare to have that decision appealed. He should not attempt to adjourn the meeting.