Gary Novosielski

If it's an elected office, that's the Honorable Dog Catcher.

The chair is incorrect. First, why does New Business not appear on the agenda? Is the agenda adopted by the assembly at the start of the meeting, or is it just plopped down by the chair, and that's it? If the latter, it is not binding at all. If the former, anyone can move to add New Business to the agenda. But even if there is no heading for New Business, it is not correct that this prevents people from making new motions. When all the business on the agenda is disposed of, and before adjournment, a member may obtain the floor and make a motion as if under New Business.

...deleted...

If you're planning to make the results of the votes public, why are you taking the votes in executive session?

No. No amount of wrongdoing can turn it into rightdoing. Permitting electronic meetings will require a bylaws amendment (and presumably some rules of order to allow for the non-standard nature of those meetings. But since the meetings were not properly called, the business transacted at them is not subject to ratification. If actions were taken as a result of those meetings, the actions can be ratified, presuming these are actions that the assembly could have authorized in advance.

Or maybe 501(c)3?

Making a motion does not affect your right to vote on it any way you want, or not vote on it if you don't.

Absolutely not.

n/m

If the rules in RONR apply, it is not correct to say that the person with the highest number (or the five highest numbers) of votes is elected. It is necessary to get a majority vote to be elected. I.e., more than half of the number of ballots that have any director votes. First you count all the ballots that have at least one director vote (count ballots, not votes). Take the lowest number that's greater than half of that, and that's your "Needed to elect" value.

The election committee has no such power. Voters have the right to abstain, partially or totally. Only the bylaws could change that rule, not some out-of-control committee with delusions of grandeur.

That would account for it.

I don't see where this quoted material came from. It does not appear to be part of this thread. Bug, perhaps? I have a vague impression that I've seen something like it before.

One obvious example would be if the minutes incorrectly recorded that you made a motion at that meeting. You would certainly know that this was inaccurate, and you should certainly offer a correction.. In any case RONR explicitly states that any current member can participate fully in the approval process.

If there are no overriding by-laws or rules, then where is it stated that RONR is the parliamentary authority? I find it almost unthinkable that the Council would have no bylaws. Does it have a policy manual? The bylaws are often included in that manual. And there must be state laws that establish the existence of municipal councils and give at least an overview of their operations.