Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Bruce Lages

Members
  • Content Count

    1,492
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bruce Lages

  1. If there really is nothing in the bylaws, I believe the board would be free to decide, by majority vote, when, where and how often they want to meet.
  2. I don't see how it's possible to answer that question with only the information given.
  3. See FAQ 20 elsewhere on this website. Hold the meeting without the director. Under RONR, the absence of any particular officer can not prevent the membership from holding a properly called meeting. If your director is normally the chair of your meetings, then the secretary (or any other member if the secretary is absent) calls the meeting to order and then presides over the election of a chair pro tem for that meeting.
  4. I'm not sure what you mean by your question "can't the matter be referred back to the executive committee?". As others have pointed out, no single member has the ability to prohibit a vote by the executive committee under the rules of RONR. Therefore, it seems to me that the matter is still very much in the hands of the executive committee, which is duty-bound to carry out the directives given to it by the membership. If the member who thought he could prohibit a vote wants to bring a motion to rescind the program to the next membership meeting, that is certainly his right. However, that shoul
  5. Also be aware that, if you appoint someone from within the organization, that person will be (or at least should be) giving up his membership rights to participate in debate and vote (unless the vote is by ballot) for as long as he serves as parliamentarian (RONR, 10th ed. p. 451, l.4-15). So make sure that the person chosen not only has the confidence of the presiding officer, but is also willing to abide by these restrictions.
  6. I realize it's only a hypothetical situation that you're presenting, but the statement "if three voters have no preference and vote for both candidates" makes absolutely no sense.
  7. Are your officers defined as a separate group from your 'executive' in your bylaws? If they are, then this officers group would approve the minutes of their own meetings. However, if they are not defined as a separate entity, then your officers are just getting together informally, not in what RONR would consider a meeting. If this is the case, they could make notes of their informal gathering, much like a committee would, and are certainly free to share those notes with the 'executive' (would that be your board?). But these notes should not be referred to as minutes.
  8. While you're considering how to interpret this customized rule of your organization, you might also want to look at the RONR description of resolution on pp 100-102. RONR uses the term to describe a complex or lengthy motion that should be in writing, and frequently uses the form of a number of "whereas" clauses followed by one or more "therefore" clauses. You'll have to decide whether the use of the word "resolution" in your rule is meant to be specific to this type of motion or not.
  9. Note also that if voting had already begun, your presiding officer was correct in denying the request to make a motion. Interruptions during voting are not permitted by RONR (p. 408)
  10. Are you certain that your bylaws do not provide that a non-voting member of the organization is granted board voting rights upon election to the board?
  11. Rather than us doing a lot of guessing - and probably not directly addressing your situation - can you tell us what specific part of Roberts Rules your other member feels you went against?
  12. OK, guest, thanks for the reply. Your question is really whether the president has the power to "censure" proposals for bylaw amendments before they are introduced to the assembly. Nothing in RONR would give the president such authority. You need to carefully review the procedures for amending the bylaws that should be in your current bylaws to see if there are any additional conditions for submitting proposals for a bylaws amendment (such as, e.g., submitting any proposed amendments first to a bylaws review committee). If there are such conditions, and a submitted proposal did not satisfy
  13. I'm a little confused by your question. You say the bylaws require that the text of any bylaw changes be included in the notice of meeting, but then ask if the president is required to do this if any member requests it. Since this is a bylaw requirement, there is no request involved - it must be done. And certainly the president, or whoever else would be responsible for preparing the notice of meeting, has no authority to ignore the bylaw requirement. Where is this request coming from, and why?
  14. Liz: I don't know if RONR can be said to have "done away with" the term executive board, but it does suggest that a sub-group of the board with authority to act should be called an executive committee, so as to minimize any confusion between the two groups (i.e., so you don't have to distinguish between the board and the executive board). An executive committee must be established and defined in your bylaws as to its members and what authority it has.
  15. Kim - I respectfully disagree. Larry stated that the bylaw article dealing with the election of the regional chairs does not have the specific language concerning their continuation in office until their successors are elected. I don't see how the absence of this provision, by itself, necessarliy indicates that there is no fixed term of office for the regional chairs.
  16. Sorry, Nancy - you beat me to it.
  17. 1) Nominations do not require seconds 2) Yes, nothing in RONR prohibits nominating oneself.
  18. RONR states "The basic principle of decision in a deliberative assembly is that, to become the act or choice of the body, a proposition must be adopted by a majority vote.." (p.4, l.5-7). Is there any credence to the view that, in light of this statement, adoption of any proposition by at least a majority vote might be considered very close to being a fundamental principle of parliamentary law? If that were the case, then trying to set a voting threshold of less than a majority would be a continuing breach as per p.244,sec.d.
  19. has not set their status

  20. I'm just a little curious as to how, if your nominating committee produced a candidate for each open office and you took nominations from the floor, you still only had one nominee for each position. Were there no nominations made from the floor?
  21. While the details of the original post are not entirely clear, I was under the impression, from many previous threads, that taking away the right of anyone to vote had to be a bylaw-level rule.
  22. Nothing the original poster has written suggests that nominations can't be re-opened at the next meeting prior to the election.
  23. Melissa, was your board in a continuation of the same meeting or another meeting the next day? The board can only transact business at a properly called meeting. It sounds like the president's request might not have occurred during a meeting. Probably not. While just agreeing to look into the information again can be done outside of a meeting, you can't do anything about a vote already taken, or formally take further action, until you are in a properly called meeting.
  24. One part of your bylaws that you will need to interpret is who is the parent body of the standing committees. That is who the committee reports to. If the disciplinary review committee is formed and populated by the general membership, the board is not involved in their work and report (unless there is another rule which addresses this specifically).
  25. IF you read the first two replies above, you'll see that Rob is addressing the issue of filling a vacancy in one or more of these offices, while David is asking about your election process. Vacancy-filling procedures, which should be defined in your bylaws, do not apply to scheduled elections of officers. Since the sub-title of your post says 'elections', perhaps David's question is more to the point. When you say that your club has a policy that the 2nd VP becomes the first VP, and the first VP becomes the president, do you mean that after being elected to the second VP position, this pers
×
×
  • Create New...