Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by jstackpo

  1. Correct; a (fake) motion to "suspend", or the corrected "postpone", could ONLY be made in a meeting, when the item to be postponed was pending - or was known to be coming up at the meeting (that latter "postpone" would be an "incidental main motion". Let's not go there.) Some orgs allow the president or the board (or someone) to reschedule an entire meeting for "emergency" reasons before that meeting time comes around, but that power must be in the bylaws. What kind of "emergencies" do you have in Santa Fe?
  2. Doctor Kapur, don't you have rounds that you should be getting to? Or an ER to keep running smoothly?
  3. And sit down -- right NOW -- and read Chapter XX in RONR -- it contains all the proper (aka "due process") steps you need to know to keep out of trouble yourselves.
  4. If the parliamentarian(s) are really restricted to advising the chair (their proper roll) and they can settle between themselves who is in the advice giving position at any moment (and the other one keeps quiet), that might work out. But if they have any other duties see https://www.dropbox.com/s/jbcnnjcq5l9eaux/Problems With co-anything.docx?dl=0 Why does the org want to do this? It is easy to think up invidious reasons. Will they have divided loyalties? Is the org willing to pay a double fee for their professional services?
  5. That is out of the question, too.
  6. Unless there is some special rule in the bylaws about postponement before the meeting begins, any effort at "postponement" would have to take place AT the meeting, and what would be postponed would be consideration of whatever motion (bylaw amendment) was pending at the time. Postponement would also be limited to no more than a quarter in the future so it seems that 2012 is out of the question. Of course the meeting could set an adjourned meeting and then adjourn. Or send the whole works to a committee. Lots of ways to delay. Enjoy your flight!
  7. 1) There is no e-book version but here's a link to a Windows (only) CD: http://www.robertsrules.com/ 2) Who selects the committee chair(s) is controlled by the bylaws, or if they say nothing, RONR, page 175 and other places -- check the index, p. 680. A little caveat emptor: RONR is due for an update in a year or so which will put the (expensive) CD version a bit behind the curve.
  8. Better to ask for "debate", rather than "questions and comments". It encourages folks to stick to the topic, and if you are lucky, prefix their remarks by "I rise to speak in favor of (or in opposition to) the motion." Better be somewhat academic and "fussy" that lead folks into confusion.
  9. Using standard phrasing helps with getting your point across: "Mr. Chairman, I move that....[exact statement of what you want]" is sure clearer than "Mr Chairman, seems to me, I think, that it might just perhaps be a good idea (I'm not making a "motion", mind you just a suggestion for the membership) if we did [such and such] or maybe [this and that] or possibly [who knows] or maybe not..."
  10. A couple of observations to head off possible controversy later on: 1). You wrote: "changes to our bylaws require a 2/3rds majority of those present at the meeting" Do you mean "a vote of 2/3 of those present and voting" or do you mean "a 2/3 vote of those present" whether the others abstain or not? The latter is a more difficult threshold to reach, and if the vote is close, can make a difference. Your phrasing is a tad ambiguous; my two offerings are straight from RONR page 402 and are clearly defined in the book. 2) As J.K. noted neither you, as moderator, nor the bylaws committee can, on your own, prevent floor amendments; only the membership can, by a 2/3 vote, do so. Another possibility to consider if it seems that there are indeed going to be, or are, numerous floor amendments, is for someone to move to send the whole mishegas back to the bylaws committee for the committee to review and come back at a later meeting with appropriate adjustments to their original proposals.
  11. Well, p. 423 is pretty firm. So is p. 97. Is that the "rule" you are asking about?
  12. 1) The "Service Gap": Page 585, "Section 3" of the sample bylaws. I'll let you have a go at figuring out the difficulty -- let you know tomorrow if you give up. 2) The "Logic Bomb": p. 588, the last two lines of "Article VIII". ditto
  13. And even RONR's sample bylaws have a "bad spot" or two.
  14. If you haven't already, give a close reading to Chapter XX, particularly starting on page 654. It pretty well covers all the steps, if your bylaws don't.
  15. In Meteorology, and that a long time ago. (At least I know how to interpret a hurricane track forecast.) Apology totally unneeded.
  16. Help us (and Chris) out by quoting the entire section of your bylaws that includes the fragment ("with a 2/3 majority...") that you did quote. What you did cite doesn't make much sense -- I too am confused.
  17. Since it is highly unlikely (in my experience) that your original bylaws defined or specified what an "inactive" status was (do they?), I would be willing to assert that the vote a year or so ago was meaningless. Unless the bylaws themselves said it was an option, you can't "suspend" bylaws, either in part - RONR page 13 - or in whole. (You could have rescinded them, but you didn't, evidently.) Thus it is fair to say that your organization simply exists as it always did; all you need do is read the bylaws, pick up the pieces (things that you might have missed doing since last November), notify the members of the next meeting and square things away. One thing to do at that first meeting is for the chair to formally declare the "inactive" motion null and void.
  18. I concur (conpurr-?) with Zev's cautions (cations-?). Check with your NH-law versed attorney.
  19. Since... "referendum votes" are not described in RONR -- they would seem to me to be a form of absentee voting which is improper unless authorized in the bylaws -- (I'll bet you could see this coming), the answer to your (implied) question would have to be in your bylaws or in the membership's interpretation of your bylaws. I don't agree with "the larger the body voting the more resolute the decision". 1 - 0 is just as decisive in determining an outcome as 345 to 582 or the like. What do you mean by "resolute"?
  20. Nope. No meeting, no business, no minutes. Besides, committees don't usually do (formal) minutes anyway (RONR, page 500) -- a report of whatever the committee was assigned to do serves as the documentation of what the committee did. That report is what is drawn up, discussed, and adopted in a committee meeting, or meetings if it is a large and complex report.
  21. Those restrictions are pretty substantial. And paragraph 356-B:37-d Executive Session tells me that you cannot have a "separate" closed meeting. Talk with your lawyer before doing something that gets your PITA friend upset and litigious. We can't give "real" legal advice here.
  22. Atul sed: "quarterly"? Correct, unless those "additional times as may be specified in the condominium bylaws" say something else.
  23. A thot: you might do well to check with the NH Law to see if there are any restrictions as to what topics you can legally consider in a closed Board meeting.
  24. There's no Statute of Limitations here (😊) but we prefer that new questions (even on old subjects) be posted as a "Start New Topic" via the green button on the first page. But to help out anyway... seems to me that you do not need to announce any upcoming "from time to time" closed meetings ahead of time as long as such a meeting doesn't replace any of the required open monthly meetings. Those closed meetings would have to be extra meetings. You will have to announce, afterwards, the availability of the recording.
  25. Sure, if he/she gets there, back on the Board that is, via whatever means may be specified in the bylaws.
  • Create New...