Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'motion'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • RONR Message Board – Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised
    • General Discussion
    • Advanced Discussion
    • The Robert’s Rules Website
  • About the Message Board
    • Questions or Comments about the Message Board

Calendars

  • Community Calendar

Categories

There are no results to display.


Found 118 results

  1. I'm having trouble finding the rules about what is supposed to happen AFTER a motion is passed or carried. I ask because I have a Board that has passed two motions that required follow-up and the Board has done NOTHING after passing the motion. I want to file some sort of grievance against the Board, but I need to cite a rule violation in order to do so. Your help is appreciated
  2. Motion to Censure

    Basic questions about making a motion to censure: The chair wishes to make a motion to censure the actions of 3 out of 7 members who acted together as a minority, without the knowledge or approval of the body as a whole. (The assembly I refer to has bylaws that state its members only act as a body) The bylaws have no prescribed means for discipline except that of removal of office, which in this case, is not the intended outcome. Can the chair make ONE motion which censures the actions of all 3? (they acted as a group outside of the whole and would be censured for the same action) When is the appropriate time for the chair to make such a motion? The situation has just come to light and the assembly meets this afternoon, any information in a prompt response will be greatly appreciated!
  3. I belong to a Chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR). It is a 501(c)(3) with about 100 members. The bylaws state: Section 2. A Finance Committee consisting of the Treasurer and four members to be appointed by the Regent shall consider requests for funds, plan a proposed budget to be approved at the September meeting and recommend to the Chapter such expenditures as the Committee shall deem expedient. ARTICLE XI. Parliamentary Authority. The rules contained in the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the chapter in all cases to which they are not inconsistent with the bylaws, special rules of order, standing rules or any rulings of the National Society Daughters of the American Revolution, or any special rules of order of the Virginia Daughters of the American Revolution, or of this chapter. At the first meeting last year the Treasurer made a motion to approve the budget. Members were not given a copy of the budget. Changes were not shown. There was no discussion. It was just approved. This year, the Regent (President) wants to follow the same procedure. She has told me: "We have no requirement to distribute the budget in advance and we will not be doing so at this time." This seems wrong, to me, since you can't consider and approve something competently if you have not seen it. Is the Regent (President) correct?
  4. Parlimentary

    Should the person who second the motion name be wrote into the meeting minutes? Example: Carter made a motion that the Bylaws go back to the committee and the committee address every issue that the chapter has standing and bring it back to the body. 2nd by Lewis Vote failed. Motion dies.
  5. Multiple Whacks at a Motion?

    Homeowners association, parliamentary authority RONR (11th ed., with the wonky blooper of the missing "not," so I'm looking at all this as if that had been corrected), nothing in our bylaws that touches on the following issue. At our monthly board meeting this past Monday, a director brought a motion to the board for consideration. The motion was poorly worded, so at the suggestion of the presiding officer (our president), the wording of the motion was amended before it was stated by the chair; then the amended version was seconded. Debate ensued on the reworded motion. A vote was taken, and the motion failed. At which point the director who had wanted to raise the issue now re-made his original motion, as had been stated (complete with its poor wording) in his original motion, now bringing it before the board as a "new motion." That "new motion" was seconded, and nobody raised any objection to taking another whack at it, and the presiding officer permitted the "new" unedited version of the motion. Debate ensued. Another vote was taken, and the motion again failed. At which point the director who had wanted to raise the issue now tried a completely new wording, but in every substantive respect in every nature and effect of the issue, amounted to a third whack at the same motion. Need I relate what ensued? . . . including that this third whack was not the final one? ... or that the final result after all whacks, the motion still failed? As I read RONR, this is not at all what our homeowners (or the board, for that matter) should have had to endure. Alright, but what would be the best RONR rule to raise against this? That a main motion can only come before the board one time during any one meeting on any one day? Or are all the additional motions considered dilatory? Or anything else out there? And since the presiding officer did nothing to put a stop to it, should any of the other directors on the board - which had clearly indicated how they would dispose of any and all whacks at this issue - stepped forward with a point of order? And then if either the presiding officer or any other director had put a stop to it via parliamentary procedure, would the director who had been bringing the motion have any recourse other than to bring a new motion at the next board meeting next month...?
  6. I am a council member of a university department. We are currently in the process of trying to update our 1978 constitution. Our department has an executive committee that in the past has been appointed by the chair for a term of 3 years. The last executive was approved by council in a motion 3 years ago. In our 1978 constitution it is outlined that he executive is elected by council and has a term of 1 year. Some members of our council want to revert back to this elected 1 year term, others want the appointed 3 year term. The chair has indicated that since the last executive was passed by motion (for an appointed 3 year term), this is now the written rule, and that it trumps our old constitution that we havent followed in a long time. Is this the case? Does that motion to approve that executive from 2014 replace the rule that is outlined in the constitution. thanks
  7. We have been told that any motion requiring a vote MUST be done under new business such as accepting the minutes and financial report of the previous meeting. In the past our agenda was: 1. Call to order, salute the flag and prayer. 2. Acknowledge visitors. 3. Present minutes of the previous meeting and motion on the same. 4. Present financial report of the previous month and motion on the same. Now we have items 3 and 4 under new business. Is the way we were doing it in the past not correct according to Robert's Rules of Order? Thank you for any and all information. Dan
  8. At a meeting last night which consisted of members as well as non-member and non-voting advisors, we elected new officers. Nominations were asked from the group and received. For each nomination, a motion of support was asked followed by asking for a second. The new officers were elected. The next day, the person drafting the minutes realized that an individual who was not a member (instead classified as an advisor) of our group had voiced a motion of support for the lone candidate for Chair. An actual member then voiced as seconding that motion. When we elected Vice Chair, the same non-member voiced a second in support for this lone candidate's nomination after a legitimate member voiced first motion of support. So, an actual member did have say at some point in the nomination proceedings. This was a complete accident on the non-member's behalf, and on our behalf for not recognizing his "illegal" motion at the time. I am very new to Robert's Rules of Order and formal meetings. From what I have gathered, it appears there is not a need for a "second" for nominations for an office position. So perhaps there is no issue with the Vice-Chair position, if I am reading this correctly. However, the non-member was the first to support the nomination for Chair. What must we do to officially address this situation? Should a new election or nomination process be held at our next meeting? Is our process okay since a legitimate member did voice support for each nomination? Appreciate any advice anyone can provide to me on the matter.
  9. 2 Motions were properly put by a member to be included in the Agenda for Annual general Meeting and was published 21 days in advance of the meeting as per the Constitution of the Club. Is it in order to remove the motion from the agenda before the meeting but after the 21 day deadline for publishing the agenda in advance? My view is that the agenda cannot be amended but that the Chair of the AGM can advise the attendees that the proposers have asked that the motions be withdrawn Note ,our constitution is silent as to anything to do with changing AGM agenda before or at meeting Advice greatly appreciated
  10. Executive Session

    After reading this thread, I have a question: Why is the motion, relating to entering or leaving Executive Session, debatable? I can sort of understand in a general sense why the motion to enter into Executive Session is debatable, within reason. For example, one member may think an issue is of a sensitive or controversial nature, while another member may not. But the motion to come out of Executive Session seems far more simple - either you want to end Executive Session or not. I know I am missing something here, but I don't know what it is so I am asking.
  11. motions

    I am the treasurer's of an association and during my report, I provided a comment we are running in the red as our expenses are exceeding our revenue and we need to consider raising membership dues or decrease our costs. During the report discussion a motion was made to increase dues, it was seconded and the motion passed. A week later the president of the association sent an e-mail stating the motion that was made during the treasurer's report to increase dues, we did not follow proper procedure of follow Roberts Rules and he discussion should have been on the agenda under new business. Did we follow proper procedure as the motion was made under the treasurer's report or do we need a line item under new business regarding increasing dues or reducing expenses? Thank you, Susan
  12. I am posting in here because we need major help with the way our meetings are run. I believe that nothing voted on in this meeting was valid, and then there's the whole other issue of administration chiming in when they should not have. The issues begin toward the end of the video. Please give your opinions
  13. Once an agenda is accepted and there is an item on the accepted agenda with no motion or resolution, our council takes it as a discussion item. We regularly have accepted agenda items for discussion without motions to discuss, but when one council member does not like the topic, he selectively shuts it down with "Point of order, no motion to discuss". Is this fair procedure? If not, what can I do to stop him from censoring?
  14. Our group has voted to approve an action without thinking it through. No action has been taken yet. The person making the motion wants to rescind it. My opinion is that a recision can be done on any motion or order where irretrievable actions or decision have not been taken. I use Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised 11th Edition. Where can I find information supporting my opinion? Thank you very much.
  15. Rescind a failed Motion?

    Our county held a first and second reading for a rezoning request in January. At the second reading there was a motion and second to rezone the property, and the vote was 3 in favor, 4 against. Our county has a 12 month moratorium on requesting a rezone the same parcel, and the type of zoning (PDD) will not exist after the 12 month moratorium, so we assumed the property would not be rezoned PDD. Now our county has an interest in rezoning the property before the 12 months is complete (developer donating some land), and the county decided to bring back the rezoning request by rescinding the vote that was made at second reading in January. From everything I can see in Robert's rules it looks like the motion to rescind is designated for motions that were approved. There is one section of Robert's rules (newly revised 11th) states that the motion to Rescind or to Amend Something Previously Adopted can be applied only to a motion on which the vote was affirmative. I asked our county attorney about this and I received the following response. **************** "Your error with the language on page 78 of Robert's is your interpretation of the word "affirmative". Affirmative should not be read to mean "passed favorably" in the context of that sentence. "Affirmative" should be read to mean "passed by a majority of the body". Whether the majority favorably passed the motion or denied the motion, the vote was by the majority." *************** End quote he then references page 305 where it talks about using this meaning of affirmative when reading sentences which state that motions to rescind apply to adopted motions. As far as I can tell, an adopted motion is a motion where there are enough positive votes for the needed majority. Are they out of order by rescinding a failed vote on a motion? The county attorney has a law degree and I don't, but it seems like you wouldn't need to rescind motions which failed usually because you should be able to just place them on the agenda again at a later date. Thanks,
  16. We have an upcoming called meeting where the primary motion to be considered is of such a nature that some would like it to require a 2/3 majority of those present to pass. I'd like to know what procedures in RONR such a preliminary motion would fall under. Would this be a suspension of rules? This seems an application of suspension. The other potentially applicable procedure would be amending by-laws but that will be out of order due to notice requirements. Thanks in advance
  17. If someone makes a motion (and it is seconded) and then discussion takes place and that person then removes their motion, do we still document that in minutes? If so, do we document the conversation that led that person to remove their motion then?
  18. EXECUTIVE SESSIONS

    What is the proper procedure to come back from an Executive Session and go back into an open session meeting?
  19. Our Council considered the appointment of an individual to a community board last evening. There were three nominees of which the votes cast were: Nominee 1 - 4 votes; Nominee 2 - 3 votes; and Nominee 3 - 1 vote. The Council membership is 9 members of which one member was absent. My question is: Would the nominee who received four votes be the appointed to the community board? There are some questions as to whether the individual was required to receive a majority of the votes cast by the attending/present members (i.e., 5 votes). (Total Council members present and voting: 8) We follow the provisions of Robert Rules of Order and our Home Rule Charter provides that "A motion must receive the approval of a majority of those present and voting for passage. I could not find any discussion which relates to our scenario and would appreciate any comments regarding this matter."
  20. An agenda item was completely omitted from approved minutes two months ago. This item included a motion which was moved, seconded, and carried. The recording secretary has written notes from the meeting with the details of the motion, and names of the mover and seconder. What is the best practice to record this? Can we simply ask that the current meeting minutes reflect the discussion from meeting #xxx, and the previous resulting motion be recorded. Should the approved minutes of the previous meeting be amended? Or a new discussion and motion take place at the current meeting? Thank you.
  21. Motion wording

    I would like to make a motion at our association meeting that will also create a long term procedure. How should I word this. "I would like our association to buy serialized ballot box padlock seals. http://www.electionsource.com/security-seals/padlock-seal.html Also I would like to make a rule that at the general membership meeting before the ballot boxes are distributed to the facilities and units, the ballot boxes are inspected, witnessed to be empty and locked with the padlock seal. The serial number to the padlock seal will be recorded as to locking the ballot box. The serial numbers assigned to the ballot box will be published and copies will be email to the membership and placed on the association bulletin boards once the ballot boxes are padlock sealed. The padlock sealed ballot boxes will be delivered to the facilities and units by the assigned shop steward. On the last day of the election the shop stewards will delivery the ballot box to the general membership. The padlock seal will be cut and unlocked while being witnessed at the general membership meeting to tabulate the votes. If there is not an assigned shop steward, the board of directors will appoint a member or members via raise of hand vote to deliver and pick up the ballot box. The appointed member will receive release to time to accomplish this task." I would like this process to be a procedure until we vote to change it.
  22. Issues at hand

    Our private organization's constitution contains the following clause entitled "Conducting Business Meetings": Any member may attend any meeting of the boards, committees and societies and speak to issues at hand if not restricted by this Constitution; though, for good order, the chairman has the right to place restrictions and policies on meeting guests. The chairmen of some boards have put guest policies in place where guests are entitled to speak to the business items on the pre-published agenda at the start of the meeting, then proceed with the board meeting in a closed session consisting only of the elected board members who are entitled to vote. These chairmen have therefore defined "issues at-hand" to mean the business motions that were on the pre-published agenda, which is always adopted as the agenda for the meeting. They believe the spirit of the constitution clause is satisfied by giving general members time to speak ahead of the formal board member debate. However, a dispute has arisen with a member who has interpreted the term "issues at hand" to mean the items under discussion at the time they are opened for debate among the board members, therefore allowing them the right to attend the closed session and be given the chance to participate in the debate. They define "at hand" to mean the real-time debate by the board voting members. Under this interpretation, there would be no closed sessions. It appears that resolution of this concern requires agreement on the term "issues at hand". This does not appear to be a formal term in RONR, and I am interested in opinions from the forum on this debate.
  23. Is the public hearing opened before or after a motion is made and seconded?
  24. Does a recommendation from a committee need a motion before the Board votes?
  25. A vote was called and ruled upon based with a majority vote. Now a member of the majority has resigned. Can the replacement member make a motion (maybe under new businesses) to revoke the past vote? Or does it need to be a sitting member of the majority from the existing vote.
×