J. J.

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About J. J.

  • Rank
    "Friday night, and the strip is hot... "
  • 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

949 profile views
  1. Dr.

    Well, if the motion "to go into executive session for the rest of the meeting" is adopted, it would have to be rescinded in order to come out of executive session. That was only thing I could see as an example. I'm trying to find an example that would need a 2/3 vote to leave executive session.
  2. Well, we don't know what the motion is. Further, "we" may know that, but clamdigger may not.
  3. Dr.

    A special rule of order is a different matter, at least potentially. I am, however, at a loss to see how a motion to go into executive session could be constructed to require more that a majority vote to come out of executive session, unless the rules were suspended. I could see a motion "That the assembly go into executive session and remain their until adjournment," but it might require a 2/3 vote.
  4. There is a case when it could; if the motion is to amend a constitution or bylaws, then it could not be reconsidered.
  5. 1. You can amend your constitution. 2. If the person is removed, can he be reappointed?
  6. Yes, or a committee dealing with disciplinary matters. That is why I indicated that context matters. Gary wrote: "Okay, it's perfectly logical. But it's still wrong." Transpower's explanation is not logical. We have two statements in the bylaw: S1. The President shall appoint all committees. S2. The members shall appoint the committee. Transpower said: " Rule 3 for bylaws interpretations, RONR (11th ed.), p. 589, states: 'A general statement or rule is always of less authority than a specific statement or rule and yields to it.' Therefore, I conclude that in your case the president has the power to appoint all committees. " I will add another point. RONR states, in Rule 4, that, "There is a presumption that nothing has been placed in the bylaws without some reason for it (pp. 590-91)." Is that conclusion correct? Transpower conclusion is that the president has the power to appoint all committees. That is consistent with the bylaw that says "The President shall appoint all committees. (S1.)" It is not consistent "The members shall appoint the committee.(S2.)" We must presume that S2 was placed in those bylaws for a purpose. Now, if Transpower's interpretation was correct, there would be no need for S2. S1 covers it. Therefore, Transpower's theory is not consistent with the rules of interpretation, Rule 4., to be specific. Now, is there an interpretation that can be consistent with S1 and S2? Well, if Rule 1 is the "general statement or rule," and that Rule 2. is the "specific statement or rule," them you get an answer that is consistent with Rule 3 and is consistent with Rule 4. QED. This argument is, in fact, the one that is more logical.
  7. Dr.

    I think that once an assembly goes into executive session, it has completely put the motion to go into executive session into effect. A motion to go out of executive session is a new motion. Usually both are adopted by unanimous consent.
  8. However, that interpretation runs afoul of the second principle of interpretation. If the bylaws mean that the only the president may appoint committees, then the phrase " The members shall appoint the committee," will be rendered absurd. There must be an attempt to read that phrase in harmony with the rule that "The President shall appoint all committees." Based on the information we have to agree with Goodwiller, Brown, Rev, and Honemann. I would be wondering it the bylaw stating that members can appoint a committee applies to a single committee. The president can appoint "all committees," but the members can appoint "the committee," as in this specific committee. The context will be paramount.
  9. Speaking only from experience, a professional parliamentarian should give advice, with the permission of the chair outside of the meeting.
  10. No. A rule in the bylaws can only be suspended if it is a rule in the nature of a rule of order or provides for its own suspension (p. 17). A rule of order "relates to the orderly transaction of business in meetings and to duties of officers in that connection (p.15)." Eligibility does not relate to the transaction of business. Further, anyone not eligible for a position cannot be "qualified," no matter how well suited for the position. It has nothing to do with the persons ability, only to if he is permitted, under the bylaws, to hold office.
  11. Well. what is the guarantee that members won't toss the notice out with the junk mail? The secretary can only send out the notice, but he cannot require anyone to read it.
  12. If the secretary puts it in the newsletter, and the newsletter goes to everyone, that should be enough. Now, if the put it extremely small font, like the kind used in currency, that is a bit of a difference.
  13. What if the newsletter is sent to every member? The rule does not say that the notice must be sent separately.
  14. Well it does mandate that disciplinary actions be conducted in executive session.