jstackpo

Too many "ifs" coming at me too early in the morning.

If it was all taking place in the same session (same or next business meeting) then Reconsider would work, too.

If the motion was postponed,  it was clearly not adopted (yet), so then any subsidiary motion is fair game once the motion has come back on the floor, as a General Order, presumably.

Not quite... Rescind can be used only on (adopted) main motions -- amend something previously adopted is the motion to use to strike out (or whatever) the portion of the main motion that is unwanted.

Notice is still important to allow ASPA to be adopted by a majority, of course.

FWIMBW, I too am reluctantly in the "any time" camp, mainly because it would be completely bizarre to assert that a chairman who didn't want the committee to meet could thus shut down the further function of the committee.  The plain text of page 499 surely doesn't allow for any two to call a meeting after the first.

But I sure wish, and hope, that RONR/12 uses the English language "more better".

4 minutes ago, Gary Novosielski said:

Does the agenda have a section labeled New Business?   If so, that's the place to move new things.

Actually... business items listed in an agenda are by definition (page 371, line 17) general or special orders.  "New Business", an order of business heading (not business itself), shouldn't be in an agenda at all. 

No, but it could be a symptom.   The only way to "dissolve" the organization is to rescind the bylaws  --  be sure you pay your debts first!

There is no rule in RONR requiring ANY notice for the introduction or adoption of motions in general.  Perhaps your association rules has such  --  best to check.

However, all the improper steps are water over the dam (or under the bridge, or wherever it goes) and since nobody raised a point of order at the time of the infractions, you should just put in the minutes what happened as you proposed, except don't say "reconsidered", unless a member actually moved that  --  it would be out of order, too, anyway.

Rest easy, your budget has been properly adopted.  Now don't go spend all your money in the same place, as you mother told you.

Mr. Brown types faster that I, and types more for that matter - he is all correct.

And just to be sure there is no misunderstanding about the minutes of the two inquorate meetings (and any other quorate ones as well) minutes should not contain  discussion or record of debate in general (p. 468: "what was done, not what was said" is all that belongs in mnutes.

So the inquorate meeting minutess should be exceedingly short since you didn't do anything (official) at those meetings.  "The meeting of the ... Association was called to order...  The meeting adjourned".  But you did meet so there should be a record of that fact, in case there is a "you must meet" rule in your bylaws.

What you do is up to your organization.  To avoid future arguments, draw up and adopt a "standing rule" that details what process is acceptable to a majority. 

A similar statement shows up on p. 426, line 9-11, in the context of preferential voting as well.

1 hour ago, Richard Brown said:

 Everything on an adopted agenda is essentially a special or general order. 

True, true.  Which in turn means that "New Business" is wide open for anything that members wish to bring up.

It is a misuse of the terms to speak of an agenda item being placed in New Business.

Keep in mind that  "Agenda" and  "Order of Business (OoB)" are quasi-independent concepts.   An agenda is a listing of known or anticipated business items (presumably in the form of motions, or close to it), page 371, while the OoB is the framework in which those (and other) items are placed, page 26, in a meeting. The New Business portion of the OoB is when, by definition, new items can be brought up.  They are items not on the agenda.

Click on this link for an extended discussion of this business.

And since the adoption of an agenda only sets items of business as general or special orders (p. 371), anything at all (within the scope of business of the association, of course) may come up under "New Business".    No need to "suspend rules" at that point.  Just make the motion.

1 minute ago, J. J. said:

Why?

The society could borrow the money

But that would require another motion.  If it was made first, and adopted, maybe OK.

But if the "overspending" motion was made (prior to the "get a loan" motion), it ("overspend") would be out of order as it would be impossible to comply with both motions (initial "spend" and subsequent "overspend") at the same time.

Well, a motion, the second one, to spend more would be out of order if there wasn't enough $$ in the bank to cover the larger (in total) amount to be spent.

And he/she can vote "No" (but not debate against) if someone convinces him that the proposal was a bad idea.

Correct - but not TOO much later. Reconsider has time limits -- see page 316 (b).

14 minutes ago, Guest TRay said:

Thank you Josh.  Trying to wrap my brain around this.  How can there be a motion if no one knows to make a motion? Would the topic have to breached?  I understand that once a motion and seconded is made we can discuss that motion and then call for a vote.  How do we get it started?  Do I just come out and make a motion out of the blue?

Exactly!

Otherwise you and the others will have no idea what you are talking about, in terms of coming to a decision.  That can make for a looooong meeting.

If you really have some idea of what is important, move to refer the general idea (stated, of course) to a committee  --  see pages 168ff. - with instructions to draw up a clear coherent motion and bring it to the next meeting.  Committees are the place to hash out possibilities, meetings are for decisions.

17 minutes ago, Guest TRay said:

We can have discussion on any topic right; should be on the agend?  Honestly, I would anticipate that a motion would not be brought forth.

RONR has no requirement that motions be placed on an agenda.   Just make the motion when you know what it is.

<soapbox>

And the vagaries of voting need a lot more discussion in the cases with three or more choices/candidates, which is where preferential voting in its various forms (rank the candidates, then Condorcet or drop the last guy or keep only the top two or score the choices with a Borda Count, &c) is appropriate.

</soapbox>

Have the Board, or other people with good memories, attempt to reconstruct the minutes of the previous AGM and present them for approval at the upcoming meeting.

Remember:  minutes need only contain what was done (i.e., motions adopted, defeated, &c) not what was said (i.e., speeches and other remarks).  See page 68 for more details.

On #4:   if neither the originator nor any other member moves the controversial amendment, then nothing more need (or should) be done.

Probably not proper to pull it off the agenda (before agenda is presented for adoption) since the notice is clearly out there.  An item on an agenda is NOT equivalent to someone moving the item. But moving to strike it when the agenda is pending is fine. It would be effectively the same as requesting permission to withdraw the item.

I'd say it would depend on the details of the notice.

If the notice gave the exact words of the proposed bylaw amendment, then "No" is my answer.

If the notice is still informative but doesn't give exact words (which it should in my view) then "Yes" is my answer.  RONR, page 596, line 27 says that "fairly inform" is adequate notice.

3 hours ago, The Fessor said:

Ha....

Is there a procedure? Does the chair adjourn or reschedule the meeting until the offending member leaves,?

I’m trying to ascertain the legitimate RR compliant course of action.

See Chapter 20 in RONR which covers your question (and a lot more).

Although I don't have a 10th edition RONR at hand to verify this, my recollection is that the Authorship Team struck out the phrase "published minutes" in preparation of the 11th edition.  (A ghostly remainder of the phrase remains in the index.) So it means what ever your association wants it to mean.

In its place is a (new) discussion of published "proceedings" (page 475) which are NOT minutes, but are for the "public".

BTW, whence came the title of this thread?

Possibly may depend on your bylaws (although the state laws, if applicable, would supersede).  Do your bylaws give exclusive authority to the board?  If not your course of action is entirely correct. 

The 2/3 vote vs. majority of entire membership question is easy:  whichever one is easiest to obtain. 

Is the COO (whatever that may stand for) actually a member of the board?  This would have to be specified in the bylaws.  If not, he has no right to "place" anything before the board.  Only members of the Board have that right.

No.   And No.