SaintCad

You still didn't answer what sex the President is. And I presume you've heard of the Oxford Dictionary Their: 1.1 Belonging to or associated with a person of unspecified sex. ‘she heard someone blow their nose loudly’

Ha ha ha ha. Maybe you can reread the OP and tell us the President's gender. Or maybe you've never heard of indefinite pronouns.

I'm not 100% sure the President exceeded their authority. Was there any motion to have this event or is it custom? Was that particular agenda approved ahead of time?

Incidently I would question if it was an official meeting if not all of the board members were invited and/or the process was not followed for a special meeting. Did this secret meeting take any action i.e. pass any motions?

What do the bylaws say about that?

I'm curious why the OP thinks the Secretary can't vote (for themselves).

Sounds like the HOA needs to contact an attorney. As for RONR, you can have a member removed for creating a distubance if they refuse to come to order when directed by the Chair. As for banning them from the meetings, what do your bylaws say about it? If silent then read Chapter XX on the Big Book.

In answer to the second question, the ballot contains the nominee's name and a blank for a write in candidate. Blank ballots or dilatory ones such as "None of the above" or "Not him" are not counted when determining a majority vote.

Are you treating it as an Amend Something Previously Adopted, an Amendment or a regular main motion? If I am interpreting this correctly it should be Amend Something Previously Adopted and requires a 2/3 vote. Also, is the membership process in your bylaws? If so it needs to follow that process and a motion to violate that process is out of order. I think we need more details. A rational what?

Has anyone asked the President why they are delaying? I would move to direct the President to execute the contract within 7 days (or other suitable and specific timeframe) and [presuming the motion passes] if they do not them bring them up on charges.

I think not. I do not believe bylaw violations can be handwaved away simply by a vote. Admittedly through Points of Order and Appeal the assembly could try to handwave it away but for that to work you basically have an assembly that needs to admit "Yeh we violated the bylaws but we don't care." and in that case why even pretend to have bylaws.

Just to clarify, I did not mean that the Chair's desire to invite (authorize) a guest overrules the will of the assembly. Merely that the Chair as well as any member is authorized to permit a visitor to attend. Whether or not they are allowed to stay is up to the assembly.

Nope. In fact if a member abstains they cannot be compelled to explain why unless it is in the bylaws [reference to a thread we had about a month ago]

I think they can but it is with unanimous consent implied meaning if any member objects the visitor's presence must be voted on.

I was thinking of p 34 l 9-10

Doesn't RONR allow for a short preface before introducing a motion?

It was my response to Dan's assumption that the Chair knows if RONR had already been accepted as the parliamentary authority.

Which serves the same purpose viz. ensuing that officially RONR has been adopted. But to make you happy Dan then the member should make an inquiry of the Chair before the motion if RONR has already been adopted.

Because if a revote needs to be done, the OP can go back and when her nomination is rejected (again) then she'll know the correct way to handle the situation. Specifically they MUST have a ballot with her name on it and a blank for write in votes. She should also hold the assembly to the rule that no debate can occur during voting. My question is: are members allowed who they are voting for or who to vote for DURING the voting by ballot?

Assuming RONR is in play it sounds like it was a Request to be Excused from Duty. It would be up to the body to decide if the duty were that as an officer (i.e. still a member but not performing the duties of their office) or a member (i.e. temporarily withdrawing from membership). A couple of things, the former would not reduce the number of members so a quorum based on total members or a majority of the membership vote would remain the same but the latter reduces the number of members by one. Also, do your bylaws allow for temporary resignations from membership?

Why hunt through old dusty minutes that wouldn't change anything and instead just adopt RONR?

I might add that the Chair is expected to maintain order even before a member raises the issue.

Just to clarify because I saw this answer in another thread a few days ago: if the requirement for membership is in the bylaws then the organization cannot add to it except by amending the bylaws. My question is where is that in RONR to show the Chair on a Point of Order?

Let's just focus on this. How is holding seminars making it a rule?

You can raise a Point of Order that the election is null and void as it violated the bylaws.