Bruce Lages

Typically, it is the chair of the committee who would present the report of the committee to the membership, concluding the report with the making of any motions arising from the recommendations contained in the report, but another member of the committee could also be designated as the 'reporting member' (RONR, 12th ed. 51:8-12). If you had provided much of the information the committee recommendation was based on, there might have been good reason for the committee chair to permit you to be the reporting member and to then make the motion. It sounds like this has been done previously for you and your committee. I believe the parliamentarian was mistaken in saying you should not make the motion based on the committee report. RONR is clear that the reporting member is usually the one who moves any recommendations contained in the committee report.

I think the currently favored practice is to have a comprehensive set of bylaws rather than a constitution plus bylaws, although nothing prevents you from having both. Having both documents, however, there is a constant risk of conflicting information between the two. What would you put in this constitution that is not, or cannot be, addressed in your bylaws?

If this letter of counseling is indeed comparable to a vote to censure. then I don't see anything in RONR that would require the subject of the letter to be present when such a letter is authorized. It's not clear how comparable these two things are - 'censure' means 'we the organization don't approve of what you did (or said)'.

Yes, under RONR a member may bring up new items via a motion under the heading of new business. An agenda does not prevent the introduction of new business unless your organization has some special rule of order to that effect. Can you rephrase your second sentence? It looks there may be some words missing.

You are quite correct that requiring the president to recuse to avoid a tie vote is ridiculous, and will not be found anywhere in RONR. Tie votes on motions, since they do not constitute a majority, simply defeat the motion. The adopted measure could be rescinded at the next meeting, as long as whatever was adopted hasn't been already carried out. The motion to use is Rescind or Amend Something Previously Adopted, which will require a majority vote if previous notice is given of the intent to make the motion, or a 2/3 vote, or a majority of the entire membership, whichever can be achieved. It sounds like, based on your description, this might be a board of directors, in which case a majority of the entire membership might be the easiest to achieve.

You say that the calendar of events is sent to the membership on a monthly basis. Is this done via email or some other electronic means? And if so, has the calendar for the month in which this rescheduled meeting will be held already been sent to the membership?

In fact, your bylaw quote could (and maybe should) end at the first comma, since everything after that comma is just repeating the wording in RONR.

An assembly can conduct business at a properly called meeting if none of the regular officers are present by electing a chair pro tem to preside, and a secretary pro tem to record minutes, as the first item of business. Accepting resignations would be in order at such a meeting as long as a quorum was present. But check your rules to see what the procedure is for resignations. RONR states that, in the absence of any other rules, resignations are accepted by the body that has the power to fill the resulting vacancy. In your case that could be your board or the general membership, depending on what body elected these positions originally. Oh, and omitting the call to order does not invalidate a properly called meeting.

Well, this is indeed a matter of imprecise terminology. I took your response to refer to a non-member of the society being the chair of a committee, which I see you did not. If the question is about someone being named the chair of a committee but not being named as a member of the committee, then I have no disagreement with your statement. But the question arose in my mind because I don't think RONR ever refers to a situation where the chair, even if not a member of the society, is not considered a member of the committee. There are special rules in some instances for a non-member of the society to be named committee chair, but in all those instances, the non-member chair is considered to be a member of the committee. If anyone has a RONR reference for a committee chair not being a member of the committee I'd love to have it. The only situation that seems somewhat relevant is when a non-member of the society is serving as the chair of a meeting, which does not grant membership in the society.

I'm sure you don't mean that a non-member chair is not considered a member of the committee, but it sort of sounds that way.

Certainly it is not appropriate to include the results of a vote taken outside of a meeting in the minutes of a previously held meeting. But do your rules allow for voting to be conducted via email? If they don't specifically provide for email voting, then that vote is invalid. If your rules do provide for email voting, then then results should be reported at the next regularly called meeting and included in those minutes.

RONR does not limit the subject matter of motions that may be introduced under new business, subject to the general restrictions on dilatory motions, motions that conflict with the governing documents, or motions that raise the same question as a motion previously decided at the same session (RONR, 12th ed., 39:5,6). There are special conditions for a motion that is outside of the society's object, as defined in its governing documents, but such a motion can still be made under new business (39:7).

Not on his own, but the board can order a disruptive member to leave the meeting by a majority vote. See RONR 61:13.

No, you do not need a quorum present to use the motion to fix the time to which to adjourn to set a time and place for an adjourned meeting. That's one of the few motions that are in order in the absence of a quorum. Clearly it's too late to apply that to your present situation, but keep this in mind for future occasions when your meeting(s) may be lacking a quorum.

Richard - I do agree that if the results had been announced, the appropriate next step according to RONR would be to declare the motion defeated. But RONR does allow for a motion to reopen the polls to be made 'until the announcement of the result is complete or immediately thereafter" (30:3, 1). I wouldn't bet very much that the polls were actually reopened in accord with that procedure though. But I do suspect, as I stated above, that this may well be a mail-in ballot vote or some other type of absentee ballot voting, so that the continuation was a move to allow more time for more members to submit their votes. I have a vague recollection that this specific scenario, i.e. extending the polling time to try to get more votes, was the subject of a previous topic here.

A meeting can be 'continued' by means of the motion to fix the to which to adjourn (RONR, 12th ed. sec. 22) which establishes the time (and sometimes the place) for a continuation of the same meeting. If this motion was being voted on at the initial meeting, it would also be possible to move to reopen, or to leave open, the polls so that voting could also be continued at the adjourned meeting (RONR Sec. 30). But I suspect, from your description, that this motion might be being voted by mail ballots or some other absentee voting method. Is that correct? If so, then a time limit for the voting period should have been set, and perhaps it was, since you say that the results were to be announced at the initial meeting. If this was the case, a motion to reopen the polls could be made.

It is certainly acceptable, as well as preferable, to hold a ballot election for only those positions for which there are multiple candidates. But your option to hold a voice vote for uncontested positions is problematic - what happens if the voice vote is not favorable to the sole candidate? If you've done this in the past how was this handled? Note that RONR states that for/against options are not in order for an election (RONR, 12th ed. 45:25). What RONR recommends is that if there is only one candidate, the chair should declare that candidate elected by acclamation (RONR, 46:40).

Guest Martha - what do you want to do with your bylaws? Do you want to prepare an entirely (or almost entirely) new set of bylaws, or do you want to make a number of smaller, more specific changes in several parts of the existing bylaws?

The protocol is that it's way too late to change your vote now.

Unless otherwise specified in the motion itself or in an accompanying proviso, motions take effect as soon as they are adopted.

RONR has no rule requiring attendance at meetings, so no, there would be no requirement to record the reason for an absence. If your organization has attendance requirements, then it can establish a protocol for recording reasons for absences, or for granting excused absences, if it so wishes.

Although a motion would have provided a written record, perhaps useful if questions arise in the future, that the assembly ordered the treasurer to include this information in the treasurer's report.

If this motion clearly identified as "Complimentary members" the officers who would now be exempt from dues, then that would seem to be in direct contradiction to what you say is the bylaws definition of "Complimentary membership", and such a motion would constitute a continuing breach as an adopted main motion that conflicts with the bylaws (RONR, 12th ed., 23:6a). A point of order can be raised at any time that motion is still in effect. I would note, however, that if the dues exemption provided for officers is just described as 'complimentary' in the sense of an absence of a dues obligation - as opposed to these officers being defined specifically as constituting a 'Complimentary membership' class - then the use of 'complimentary' may be just an unfortunate error in wording that should be corrected as soon as possible via a bylaw amendment. It appears to me however that you also may be dealing with another continuing breach arising from an adopted motion that conflicts with the bylaws. If your organization has a dues structure, then that structure should be defined in the bylaws, and a main motion is certainly not sufficient to exempt any member or members from their dues obligation. That could only be done by amending the bylaws. So your course of action is to raise a point of order - at a membership meeting if it is the general membership that has the power to amend the bylaws - citing the conflicts between the adopted motion and the bylaws. If the chair rules against your point of order be prepared to appeal, which requires a second (RONR, 24). A majority vote not to uphold the decision of the chair will sustain your point of order.

If the two projects are truly totally independent of each other, then the motion can be divided into consideration of each of the two projects separately on the demand of a single member. See RONR, 12th ed., 27:10 for division on demand, and section 27 in total for the motion Division of a Question, which describes the conditions when a motion and majority vote is required to divide a question into its separate parts and consider some or all of them separately.

Changes to properly noticed bylaw amendments can be made at the meeting at which the amendment is to be voted only if the proposed change falls within the scope of notice for the amendment. As a relevant example, if someone in your congregation submits a properly-noticed amendment to change the 90 day notice period to 50 days, a motion may be made at the meeting to change the 50 to any number between 50 and 90, whereas an attempt to change the 50 to a number greater than 90 or less than 50 would not be in order. Scope of notice refers to the space between what your current bylaws require and what the noticed amendment proposes. Any change that is outside the scope of notice is not valid even if no one present objects to it.