Gary Novosielski

Presuming that the state statute applies, and that your articles and bylaws do not provide otherwise, it appears you do have wide latitude.

You are free to duplicate the provision in your bylaws, but I'd advise against it.  Any computer coder knows that information stored in two places will typically disagree.

But once the decision is made to hold electronic meetings, whether voluntarily or hypothetically in compliance with statute, what remains is the development of rules to make the process smoother.  and 9:36 is an excellent place to start, along with the appendix entries: Sample Rules for Electronic Meetings.

Yes, a motion to censure a member is in order if RONR is your parliamentary authority.  But apart from expressing the displeasure of the assembly with the actions of the member, censure carries no consequences beyond that.  Censure can be a "penalty" imposed as a result of a formal discipline process, or as the result of an ordinary main motion.

If you think a more severe penalty is in order, you'll need to check your bylaws to see if there are any disciplinary procedures contained there.  If not, the procedures in RONR (12th ed.) would apply, contained in Chapter XX. Specifically, since these alleged offenses occur outside of a meeting, the procedures in §63 would be used.  These cover the methods of conducting investigation and trial of members.

If your bylaws do not list specific offenses with which a member may be charged, RONR provides that any organization may charge a member with “conduct tending to injure the good name of the organization, disturb its well-being, or hamper it in its work" or the like.  It's a fairly complex process, and you may want to try a simple censure resolution first, and see whether that improves matters (or makes them worse) before starting a full-blown investigation.

Check out that section of RONR and come back with any questions that come up.  I'm sure there will be several.

I suspect you are using "table" in a sense not used in the U.S.

49 minutes ago, Guest Puzzling said:

Having no (full) board is worse than electing not eligible members in this case 

I believe they are the same, since both result in having nobody elected.

It could most easily be accomplished as a correction at the next meeting, when approval of minutes is pending.

On 6/20/2021 at 8:04 AM, Guest Puzzling said:

I like the idea of having a separate gavel for the vice president. (Just like regalia) but then which gavel should the vice president use at the different situations?

Preferably full pirate regalia.

5 hours ago, Guest Lisa B. said:

Can items be changed if a Budget is approved and voted on at yearly meeting.

If the rules in RONR apply, then yes.

You can use the motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted (RONR 12th ed. §35).

This requires a second, is debatable and amendable, and for passage requires:

• a 2/3 vote if no previous notice has been given; or, 
• a majority vote if notice of intent has been given at the previous meeting, or in the call if the current meeting; or,
• a vote of a majority of the entire membership (of the body that is meeting);

any one of which will suffice.

5 hours ago, Guest Joyce said:

Can you change the voting members on a board by vote right before taking an important vote by the board on another subject?

What happens after the change is not particularly relevant.  But I'm not sure you can just change the members of a board by a vote, unless your bylaws provide for such a thing.  Is this the normal time for elections of board members, or is this some other type of change?

1 hour ago, Guest Janice Cowher-Russo said:

During a General Meeting. doesn't the Treasurer give a report?

 

This is a nine year old thread on a different subject.

Please ask you question by starting a new topic.

19 hours ago, Guest Robert's Rules Rookie said:

What is the time-frame for when a meeting that was adjourned due to lack of quorum have to be rescheduled? Can it just be adjourned to the next regular meeting (2 months away) or does there have to be a special meeting? Thanks!

The time frame was any time before the meeting was adjourned.  This is one of the few motions that can be adopted without a quorum present.  If the meeting was adjourned without setting a time to which to adjourn, it's just over.

Your next regular meeting will occur as usual.  If it's urgent enough to call a special meeting, and your bylaws allow those, that's another option.

Agreeing with Mr. Merritt, it might be of interest to you that the procedure he suggests can be done without a quorum present, which eliminates the need to cajole people to show up at a meeting that likely will not accomplish anything except setting a future meeting date.

It would be good to let the members know what your intentions are with respect to the annual meeting.

Quote

49:12      As a general principle, a board cannot delegate its authority—that is, it cannot empower a subordinate group to act independently in its name—except as may be authorized by the bylaws (of the society) or other instrument under which the board is constituted; but any board can appoint committees to work under its supervision or according to its specific instructions. Such committees of the board always report to the board.            [emphasis in original]

The main problem was the confusion of an order of business (presumably a special one), with a Special Order, which is not an order of business at all.

I apologize for anything I said that contributed to the confusion, and reaffirm anything that I said that dispelled it.

9 hours ago, Guest Tomm said:

I'm confused on how to process a resolution. 10:19 says the preamble is amended last, which obviously means the resolved portion is debated and amended first! 

Question: Does each portion of the resolution get voted on separately meaning two votes are required to pass or fail the resolution?

Aside from the votes on any individual amendments, only one vote is required to pass the entire resolution. 

The wording of the Resolved portion is debated first, and when no (further) amendments are offered, no vote is needed, as the desired wording has been decided.  Debate then occurs on the Whereas clauses, and when no (further) amendments are offered, that wording has now been decided, and the wording of the resolution (as amended) is then the pending question.  Further debate may occur.

Eventually, a vote is taken to either approve or reject the resolution.

On 6/16/2021 at 1:52 AM, Shmuel Gerber said:

Isn't it obvious? In the first case the member is counted in the quorum, and in the latter case he is not. 😉

Oh, great.  🥴

On 6/10/2021 at 7:55 AM, Weldon Merritt said:

Maybe not. But to me, "should never" seems stronger than "should not."

And where would "should not ever" fit in the list? 🙂

On 6/13/2021 at 6:37 AM, Guest Puzzling said:

I saw that , just wanted to express my gratitude in a nice way , why am I so often misunderstood 

Ah, I misread your reply as saying that we had to wait for that to occur in the future.

"I'm just a boy whose intentions are good;
"O Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood" 🎵

18 hours ago, Guest Puzzling said:

I do notice that if people see two or more solutions to a question they most often support the solution that gives them the most (personal) benefit 

I'm shocked; shocked.

Just now, Guest Question man said:

If you follow Robert’s rules who is higher up on the organization the officers or the general body There are some that think they are equal my question is don’t the elect board  have the right for respect from the body or are they equal to the body 

The officers and board are subordinate to the general body. 

1 minute ago, Tim Wynn said:

But it's easy to see why someone might think so:

"In organizations that have adopted this book as parliamentary authority and that have not adopted a special order of business, this series of headings is the prescribed order of business for regular meetings, unless the periods intervening between consecutive regular meetings are usually more than a quarterly time interval (see 9:7)." - RONR (12th ed.) 41:6

😉

Just because they adopt a special order of business doesn't make it a Special Order of Business.

10 hours ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

Is this true even if the governing documents actually deprive these members of the right to vote on the pending question? 

I think not.  But then would they count toward the quorum requirement?  Perhaps if two of the four are disqualified, the quorum becomes a majority of the remaining two, i.e. two.

20 minutes ago, Tomm said:

 

So are you saying that a Special Order of Business is only good for one particular agenda or meeting?

What if you wanted to permanently change and rearrange or remove the items of the standard order of business? Wouldn't that now be called Special Order of Business?

 

No, I'm saying that the term Special Order of Business is not a term.

A Special Order pertains to one item of business for one meeting.

The Standard Order of Business contains a subdivision called "Special Orders", which occurs fourth in the Standard Order of Business.  It is possible to revise the order of business to add or delete categories, or you can adopt an agenda for the meeting, in which case an order of business would not be used.

1 hour ago, Tomm said:

Is a Special Order of Business basically the same thing as a Special Rule of Order? 

It can be either included in the Bylaws as a Bylaw or written and documented separately as a Special Rule of Order?  

No.  A Special Rule of Order is as you have described.

A Special Order (not "of business)  is a question or item of business that has been set to be taken up at a particular hour, and takes precedence over any other business that may be in progress at that hour. 

On 6/13/2021 at 7:40 PM, Guest rkwrn54@msn.com said:

Our association rules specify that a motion is made one month and voted on the next month. We had a motion that was voted on and passed. Then a gentleman said that according to RROO, he can amend the motion on the day of the vote and ask for the motion to be tabled even though it had been voted on already - and he did. Is this, in fact, from Robert's Rules of Order and if it is, could you tell me where to find that rule and interpretation?

There is a motion to Reconsider which can be made after the motion passed.  But it can only be moved by someone who voted on the prevailing side of the original motion--in this case by someone who voted Yes on it.  How did this gentleman vote?

1 hour ago, debbokay said:

We are a Cdn. Housing Co-op Board of 7 and we will be voting for 3 new directors.

 

The new Board will be meeting the very next day to vote for Executive positions.

 

How can the newly elected directors make an informed voting decision without knowing the past or having any access to the last year's minutes?

 

There are no bylaws or policies covering this.

There's no reason why newly elected directors would not have access to prior years' minutes, but admittedly not much can be learned in one day.