Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Lumpy52403

Members
  • Content count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lumpy52403

  • Birthday 11/29/1975

Profile Information

  • Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Recent Profile Visitors

310 profile views
  1. I'm looking at this motion and wondering exactly what we have here. If this is treated as a motion to postpone to a time certain, it can only be postponed to the next regular meeting occurring within a quarterly time interval. But it really isn't a "time certain," since the amended project might not ever be presented. If no such "amended project" is in the works, could this be considered a motion to postpone indefinitely?
  2. By "in advance," do we mean before the beginning of the current meeting (e.g., via mail or e-mail), or during the current meeting at some time before their approval? In some organizations, the printed minutes of the prior meeting are distributed at the beginning of the current meeting and the members are given time to peruse them, offer additions and corrections, and approve them. Sometimes they are read aloud, but usually not, in my experience. (Frequently, organizations make the mistake of voting on the approval of minutes, but that's another topic.)
  3. Adjournment

    Yes, it's worth mentioning, because you just answered my original question in one sentence. Thank you.
  4. Adjournment

    Suppose an agenda is adopted at a meeting and includes a time at which the meeting is to adjourn. Is a motion to adjourn prior to that time (either as a privileged motion or as an incidental main motion when no other motion is pending) in order? And if it is in order, would it fall into the category of amending something previously adopted, thus requiring a 2/3 vote?
  5. This question arose recently in a group of parliamentarian friends: (1) A main motion is made and seconded. (2) A motion to postpone indefinitely is then made and seconded. (3) A motion to amend the main motion is made, seconded, discussed, and adopted. (The chairman recognizes that amend outranks postpone indefinitely.) It looks as though the question is now on the motion to postpone indefinitely. However, the motion to postpone indefinitely was made on the main motion in its original form, which no longer exists. Some of us said that the motion to postpone indefinitely should fall to the ground for this reason, and others said it should be voted upon. We could not find a definitive answer to this in RONR, although we did find a similar scenario involving the motion to commit, rather than amend. What are your thoughts on this?
  6. President rescind

    The responses above generally agree that the newly-elected president's resignation (or whatever you want to call it) results in the newly-elected vice president becoming president, unless the bylaws specify otherwise. Is this still true even if the bylaws specify a future date when newly-elected officers actually take office (e.g., election in May for a fiscal year beginning July 1)? The original question indicated that the person who withdrew "never took office."
  7. Motion requiring notice

    A member wishes to make a motion to spend an amount of money in excess of the amount that can be voted upon without notice being given at least one meeting prior to voting. Is it more appropriate for the presiding officer to (A) rule the motion out of order, as it exceeds the threshold, but consider it as fulfilling the "notice" requirement, or (B ) allow debate on the motion to occur after reminding the assembly of the notice requirement? To ask the question another way, is it appropriate to allow the assembly to debate a motion for which a vote will not be in order until a future meeting?
  8. Old Business

    There is a tendency for many organizations to allow discussion to take place in meetings without formal motions being made, and to use "old business" as a place to discuss topics that have been discussed previously without being dealt with definitively. I think that is what the original post is asking.
  9. Breach refers to something broken. A breech is part of a gun.
  10. Ballot vote for visually impaired member

    Thank you for your responses; I will proceed accordingly.
  11. Elections in my organization are typically uncontested and thus done by acclamation. We need to have a special election to fill some vacant positions, and at the previous meeting, there were multiple nominations for the same offices, so a ballot election is in order for the December meeting. We have one member who is legally blind. I have found nothing in RONR or our bylaws pertaining to assisting someone with a ballot vote. Does anyone have suggestions on how to deal with this? I certainly don't want to cause him any embarrassment or intrude on his privacy. Although I am no longer an officer at the local level for this organization, I am a member of the chapter in question and also a district officer who oversees this chapter and two others.
  12. Invalid Ballot?

    Eight votes is exactly half of 16 votes cast. A majority, by definition, is more than half. Thus, the minimum number of votes to constitute a majority in this case is 9.
  13. Invalid Ballot?

    At the risk of overstating the obvious, I think it should be emphasized that with the facts presented, no candidate received a majority in this example. Since "illegal" votes are counted in the total votes, the total is indeed 16, so a majority would be a minimum of 9 votes, not 8. While this might be blatantly obvious to some of us, far too often I hear people confuse "majority" with "plurality."
  14. Although I have just begun posting here, I will add my $0.02 worth. My introduction to parliamentary procedure happened in high school when I was on an FBLA parliamentary procedure team. I observed some older friends preparing for a competition during my freshman year, and in my sophomore year I was invited to join the team. At that time, we used the 1990 edition of RONR. At the same time, I was appointed as the youth representative to my church's executive board. Fast-forward more than twenty years. When I became an officer in a fraternal service organization, I saw that the meetings had much room for improvement. That led me to buy a new copy of RONR, and also to look online to refresh my memory of parliamentary procedure. Then I found this forum, where I have been reading past and current threads to expand my knowledge. Now that I am president (actually an organization-specific title equivalent to president) of the aforementioned organization, I hope to bring more order to our meetings. One strategy I am using is to post a short article about parliamentary procedure in our organization's newsletter. So far, I have covered (A) the difference between lay on the table and postpone definitely, and (B ) previous question, both of which seem to be commonly-misunderstood topics.
  15. Election by acclamation

    Both points are well taken. In my particular case, that does not apply. Even though we have three trustees, their terms are specified (one-year, two-year, and three-year), so they are elected individually. Duly noted. When you spit in the wind, carry an umbrella.
×