jstackpo

6 minutes ago, Josh Martin said:

As a result, if a motion to adopt Budget A and a motion to amend by substituting Budget B are made, a member who wishes to consider Budget C should speak in debate and urge members to defeat the motion to substitute, and that he will offer a motion to substitute Budget C if this occurs.

Hold on here:  it would be perfectly proper to move to substitute C for B  when B is pending as a primary amendment.  See p. 154, footnote.   Doing so will, however, block any amendments to C while it is pending.   And limit them if C is adopted as a replacement for B.

Sure, but the best bet would be to use the Borda Count - but you'll have to adopt special rules of order first.  It will be worth it.

Before you go to a lot of work, you might want to check to see if the Board has the authority to set (or amend) rates in the first place  - that question may be governed by your state (utility-?) laws.  Whether the coop membership can override the board in rate-setting  might also be in the law(s).

Like an interim or partial report from a committee?  RONR, p. 527?

Yes, via a straightforward motion to do so.

Or you could gin up a more complex proviso that spelled out some sort of transition steps that will take you, your association, from the current structure to the new one.  You can adopt whatever pleases you, as long as a majority agree to the proviso, and 2/3 (unless you bylaws say something else) agree to the adoption of the new bylaws.

I can't speak for the NAP Examinations, but if you were present (even if asleep, say) when a motion was adopted by unanimous consent, you have the right to move reconsideration, other limits, such as timeliness, &c, not being in the way.

No. 

But it might be possible to amend the adopted motion which will give the members the opportunity to vote according to how they might have changed their minds.

The answer is most likely yes, but...

Who, what group,  adopted the document produced by the committee?

A motion does  not  expire, unless the content of the motion says it does.

You will have to ask your Michigan non-profit law person what it means.  We can't do law here.  Ask him/her to back up the assertion (of 100%) with a citation that is clear and understandable.

After you have read the section, please let us know what you mean by   "...requires a constitution to be accepted"   Who is doing the accepting, and who sez they have the right to accept (or reject) the new constitution?

Perhaps you mean the (future) members of the association being formed have to adopt the constitution.  If that is what you meant, fine, no problem.

And also, as applied specifically to a bylaws revision, on pages 593ff.

40 minutes ago, Josh Martin said:

 but most people do not carry a copy of RONR or RONR In Brief at all times.

They don't?!?    I am shocked -- SHOCKED -- to hear that.

Or if you want to fill the blank spot, go to page 583.

The publishers  decide that sort of thing.  There is a new edition coming out in 2020 or so - I guess we will have to wait and see.

Voting not do do something is not proper.   Maybe you mean cancel the previously scheduled meetings.

The words "ordinarily" and "may be changed" sure sound as though you can.

Yeah... sure... but... it would be MUCH better if the motion was made BEFORE the "discussion" got under way.  That way the folks at the meeting will have a clear understanding of what they are supposed to be discussing.

13 minutes ago, Guest Margaret said:

The chair and the vice chair believe that they (as officers) have the authority to bypass that procedure and make decisions on their own, on a case-by-case basis. 

Well, the chair (and vice-chair) had better produce some documentation in the bylaws giving them that authority, before they get in trouble with the membership.  Mere "belief" ain't gonna cut it.

If a member wishes to raise  point of order (which is a member's right), that has to take place in an actual meeting so it, the point and the chairman's ruling on the point, &c (see page 247ff.), can be dealt with by standard procedure.  So in answer to your questions (in the order you asked):

Handle?:  Don't put it in the minutes

Majority?: Good, vote down any motion proposing to put the "addendum" in the minutes

If disapprove?:  No, the rest of the minutes will remain as (either previously or eventually) approved

Charges?:  None whatsoever. See Chapter 20.

Point?:  Nope - first paragraph above.

BTW an "addendum" to minutes (even if proper) IS an amendment to the minutes.  Any change to something proposed (or previously adopted) is an "amendment".

Addendum(!):  And Dan types faster, and says less, than I do.

And take a look at page 588 to see how to resolve the (apparent) inconsistency in your bylaws.

And while you are at it, define what "active members" means as opposed to just plain "members."  (This latter may be in your bylaws, so be sure to go look.)

RONR has no requirements for such, except in some special cases.  What is the nature of the "item"?

And "Active member" is not defined in RONR, just "member".  Do your bylaws make some sort of distinction between "members" and "Active members".  If not, then it, most likely, just means "members".

Well, he, the non-member, would have voting rights in meetings of the committee but not in the assembly meeting(s).  No problem if that is what you were asking.

And if you, collectively, appoint members who are at the meeting to the "Minutes Approval Committee" be sure to do so as near the start of the meeting as possible.   That way, they might pay (more) attention than otherwise.  (You should be so lucky.)