Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. The president of the board is also on the council via ex-officio member. So as a member of the special council as ex-officio - can the president remove a member on that council - according to roberts rules? this would be a clarification of my original post.
  3. When a special meeting is scheduled and the topic is provided, can the board vote on a new topic during that meeting? For example, a special meeting is called because Johnny wants to register to play baseball after registration closes. If the board votes to open registration so Johnny can play, can someone make a motion to now discuss and vote on what to do with the teams now that Johnny has joined after registration.
  4. The board can allow comments by non-board members at any point in the meeting it prefers, but customarily it is done at the end of the meeting. I have also seen it done at the beginning of the meeting. To allow nonmembers to participate in debate is a different matter. That can be done by suspending the rules, but it requires a 2/3 vote.
  5. The Bylaws allow at meetings of the Board "time allotted for Members to make comments". This relates to non-Board members who are in attendance at Board meetings. Would it make a difference if the members were allowed to make their comments at the end of the Board meeting after the Board has concluded its business but prior to adjourning, or if they were allowed to comment during the Boards debate process, (i.e. after the chair stated the motion but before they voted.) I'm probably wrong, (as usual!) but I feel that allowing the comments during the actual debate process kinda changes the intent of the term "comment"? It's almost like allowing non-board members to actually participate in the Board meeting's motions? Or is the allowance of comments, just that comments and allowed at anytime?
  6. Agreeing with the above responses, I would add that your parliamentarian is familiar with your rules and governing documents, and we are not. As a result, I am not comfortable questioning his judgment.
  7. The President has such powers as the bylaws provide. I doubt they provide anything resembling such powers. I do not know what you mean by the president (ex-officio). An ex-officio member of a board is a person who is a member of the board by virtue of holding another position. The board, similarly, has such powers as are provided in the bylaws. The board cannot remove a member unless the bylaws provide that it can. I would not be surprised if they do so provide, though.
  8. Can the president (ex-officio) of the board remove a sitting member of a special council and/or dissolve such council? Or does the board need to vote for removal? references would be much appreciated
  9. I recall previous threads that have touched on this situation, including the fact that a judge said that things were okay the way they had been done. It would appear let you wish to challenge the judicial ruling. You will need to speak with the lawyer about that.
  10. That would probably put the opinion on a stronger foundation and make it easier for members to understand and accept the rationale behind it. But it is not strictly necessary.
  11. An opinion from a parliamentarian is just that — an opinion. The assembly itself has the final say, if a timely point of order is actually raised, as to whether the election was valid. The presiding officer, not the parliamentarian, makes the ruling on the point of order, but his ruling can be appealed to the assembly which has the final say. We need more information as to just what happened and what your bylaws say about such things as terms of office in order to give you any worthwhile advice.
  12. I don’t see why not. The provisions in RONR are rules of order which can be superseded by special rules of order unless RONR provides otherwise. A special rule of order that all notices can be sent via email would seem to do just that if the bylaws are silent as to the manner of sending notices. It would then be incumbent upon the members to provide an email address in order to actually receive the notices, but that would also be the case if the provision was contained in the bylaws. It is also the case that in order to receive notices via U.S. mail the members must provide the organization with a valid postal mail address.
  13. Thank you! Yes I know it is nuts ! But a Judge in court ruled they were an legal association . Strange this board wrote they used Robert Rules! So now we have to deal with by-laws ! By-laws written to give them a endless time as officer of the Board . and to give there reason that another person can not take office ! America In The Dark ! This crap goes on !
  14. Yesterday
  15. This is all nuts. See RONR pp 553ff for how to form a new association.
  16. I can't speak about the 30 days because that rule doesn't exist in RONR and (if the rule indeed exists) those details would likely be located in the club's bylaws or applicable law. As for the incumbents staying in office that may or may not be true depending on how the bylaws define their terms of office (RONR pp. 573-574). Also, the law regarding a Director not voting when having a "conflict" might not be applicable in elections (RONR pp. 407-408).
  17. We got an opinion from a Parliamentarian that our club election was “null and void” because the first ballot had an error so had to be reprinted, but the voters had the required 30 days with which to vote. He provided no authority and his conclusions were that the incumbents would stay in their positions and even directors running in contested positions could vote on the election issues. Don’t Parliamentarians have an obligation to support their “opinions” with the authority in RONR on which they rely. This Parliamentarian is an attorney and failed to provide notice in his opinion that State Las prohibits directors with conflicts of interest from voting. Thanks for your response. Colleen Allen Grady
  18. Because the group of people declared themselves an association They did not have 51% to favor them ! no by-laws written ! A water-bill proxy came to ones home stated no reply the proxy would be used as they desired. Acting association sent out proxy requesting approval of their private written by-laws be approved and adopted. The lack of response to proxy gave them favor votes ! Now they declared that their by-laws were now adopted! Even years after they amended that by-law and again without a favor support of majority members ! Is this legal? By-laws can be forced on members ? I think even using the forceful proxy had to be approved in a majority voted set of by-laws first ! What is your take on this subject ? Does association need to start from scratch on the beginning of By-laws
  19. In the order you asked... Immediately after the president declares him/her elected, unless your bylaws say otherwise. Gracefully step down and go sit with his/her fellow members.
  20. during meeting a election of officers on the board and after conclusion of votes When does the new officer take chair? What does the old officer do?
  21. This site is immensely valuable! Thank you so much!
  22. You did a "Screen Shot", not a cut and paste. The screen shot turned your selected text into a .png (graphic) file.
  23. Only in the colloquial, incorrect sense (where the term "order of business" better fits).
  24. Yes. But it probably doesn't matter, and it doesn't accomplish anything unless a quorum is present.
  25. Guest

    unanimous vote?

    Hello. If all the members present at a properly noticed meeting vote for a motion, but some members were absent, is that still a "unanimous" vote?
  26. A.) Yes. B.) I presume this is a roll call taken by some rule or custom of the assembly. I think this is indeed related to the conduct of the meeting. C.) No, I don’t think so. No, I don’t think the adoption of an agenda solely for these items is necessary or proper.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...