Weldon Merritt

Close. I would recommend something more like, "I move that the resolution regarding [subject], adopted [date]. be amended by striking 'Sept. 9, 2023' and inserting 'Aug. 31, 2025.'" If there is any possibility of confusion, you can be even more specific and specify the clause in which the date is to be changed.

Good point. I didn't think of that angle.

If the rules in RONR apply, you need not list the recusal at all, unless you do a roll call vote (and then the members would be listed as abstaining; no need to specify "recused'). But since you are talking about a city council, there may be statues or other rules that supersede the rules in RONR. so you need to check those. Or consult the city attorney. Note that even under RONR, the member may request that his recusal and abstention be recorded, but the council would be under no obligation to grant the request.

Your bylaws should define the board membership, so that's where you need to look. If the only officers listed as board members are the president and teh secretary, then they are the only officers who are on the board. There is no "default" board membership. Ideally, there should be a specific article that defines the board membership in one location; but you need to look at all of the bylaws provisions to see if there is anywhere else that states that the VP and treasurer serve on the board.

I assume from our description od the deliberative body that you are talking about a board. If so, then no, under the small board rules in RONR, seconds acre not necessary. RONR 49:28(2).

I was about to post a resumes saying much the same thing as Mr., Katz said in hos more detailed response. So I will just say that I concur with his response.

Yes, I agree with that. And I apologize if I misunderstood your point. I thought you were saying that the vote should not be counted. An error I would not have made if I had looked back at your earlier response.

I certainly don't disagree that they said it, nor with what they said. What I disagree with is your interpretation of "at the time the vote is taken." And I am not going to speculate about what they might have said, but didn't.

Even then, the president's authority is not absolute, as "such an order may be appealed by a member." RONR 61:18.

Your organization appears to be conducting votes differently than contemplated by RONR, under which the polls generally are not kept open for multiple days So RONR has no directly applicable rules. However, voting is a fundamental right of membership, so I would venture to say that unless your organization has a rule to the contrary, if a person was a member at the time theirs vote is cast then the vote should be counted. Others may have a different view, and if so, I hope to hear from them. I certainly am open to being persuaded.

If the chair declared the motion lost, and no one raised a Point of Order at the time then the chair's declaration stands. So obviously, amending something previously adopted would not be applicable. And it's too late to move to Reconsider. The only option now is for someone to simply make the motion again, and do it properly next time. Of course, three is no guarantee that the motion will pass next time, but if not, it will be because the result was properly calculated, and not berceuse of a mistake.

Or it could be in a random order determined in some specified manner.

Glad to be of help. I think that's the wisest course, to avoid setting a precedent that you may later regret.

True. But if any member demands that the negative vote be taken, it must be taken. So I would be leery of proposing any such resolution unless the member's service was truly exceptional. And even then I would think twice about it.

QED!

Well it seems to me that you are about 20 years overdue! So far as RONR is concerned, you are not an organization at all! Just a bunch of people who get toother and act as if they are a proper organization. My suggestion is to start by hiring a professional parliamentarian to help you get it all done right, and maybe a lawyers if you want to be incorporated. You can get a list of professional parliamentarians from eithers (or both) the National Association of Parliamentarians (www.parliamentarians.org) or the American Institute of Parliamentarians (www.aipparl.org).

Do you have any document that defines all of that, even if not called "bylaws"? If you do, how and by whom was it adopted? And if there is no such document, my initial questions stand. Do you perhaps have Articles of Incorporation?

Are you saying that you have had no bylaws for the past 20 years? Then how do you know how many officers you have and who they are? And how were they selected? For that matter, how do you know who your members are?

That doesn't mean that you have to accept.

I do.

Another way to look at it is that if all three were absent, the bylaws could not reasonably be interpreted to mean that no one else can chair the meting as chair pro tem. And if all (or any of them) are present, but refuse to preside. the assembly likewise cannot reasonably be presented from electing a chair pro tem. The only question is (as Mr. Gerber suggests) is whether the officers or should, be disciplined for neglect of duty. They may technically be liable, but if the assembly is OK with someone else presiding, then presumably no one will initiate any such action.

Was the 3-year old More accurately, the bylaws copy that you (should) keep for distinction to the members should be updated. The actual bylaws language os in the text of the motion as adopted. I hope that the minutes in fact include the text of the amendment, and not just smoothing like, "the proposed amendments were adopted,"

Because Amend is a higher ranking subsidiary motion than Postpone Indefinitely.

Not unless the bylaws give him that authority (which seems unlikely). He may be correct in thinking that the actions are null and void (I obviously have no way to know), but he does not have the authority to unilaterally make that determination. That would have to be done by the board at a properly called meeting.

💥