Gary Novosielski

Perhaps, but the requirements would be those of your organization. RONR has no requirements for adopting an agenda, and to some degree discourages the practice as unnecessary, if the standard order of business is observed.

It's not my favorite, but as it is mandated in your bylaws, it is, for your organization, the only acceptable election process.

The president's interpretation is correct.

I think it means that the contents of the report, if and as amended, must be approved by every member. There is no comparable case in RONR where pieces of a motion may be added by those in favor, while the will of those opposed is ignored.

No matter what the vote threshold was, if the motion failed, then those opposed to it prevailed. They are therefore considered to be on the prevailing side. (The phrase 2/3 majority vote is ambiguous. I presume you meant a 2/3 vote rather than a majority vote.)

The results of a voice vote on a main motion would be that the motion passed or failed. The exact language of the motion and the result (adopted or rejected) would be recorded in the minutes. If the vote was actually counted, then the counts would also be recorded. If the vote was by roll-call, then the names and vote of each voter would also be recorded.

No, it won't even let me read the message, let alone reply to it.

Neither use of the word charter seems to be a good match for that of mandate. Oxford defines charter as: A written grant by the sovereign or legislative power of a country, by which a body such as a city, company, or university is founded or its rights and privileges defined. I'm not sure what brown book you're referring to, but the word appears 39 times in RONR, and 11 more in the index. And unless the organization is to be incorporated, I see no reason to ask a lawyer to draft one. In the States, the term typically refers to a corporate charter, granted by a state, which creates the legal entity of a corporation. It is part of the founding documents of a corporation, and outranks the constitution (if any), and the bylaws, so that motions that conflict with the charter are not in order. That appears to be the only meaning taken in RONR. I suppose you are free to call your committees charters if you like, but I see a substantial risk of confusion, with no corresponding reward.

When I open the Unread Content page, I see this: But when I try to open it, it tells me I'm not authorized. That's as may be, but then why is it shown to me?

Yes, I think that that's an awful rule that can only cause trouble. "Occasionally?" On what occasions would that rule apply? "Cannot wait?" According to whom? The person who wishes to do something that the committee probably would not approve of? And what is the role of this committee? Typically a committee can only report recommendations to its parent body, so it's hard to imagine a decision to recommend something of such import that the recommendation cannot wait for the committee to actually recommend it. Even then, it would have to wait for the next meeting of the parent body to act on the recommendation. Out of session seems pretty straightforward. I'd say it means at all times except when the committee is actually meeting--i.e., it has been called to order and has not yet adjourned.

I am the very model of contentment.

Then amend the rules to remove the ambiguity.

I'll say this one last time. You can do things however you want, Complaining that RONR doesn't get deeply involved in this area is pointless, because it does not prevent you from doing things your way either. If you like the way Webster's suggests, adopt rules to implement that system. Whenever you feel the urge to complain about the shortcomings of RONR in this area, stop, think about how, in your view, it should be done, and propose rules to implement that process. I'm pretty sure that will be a better use of your time. RONR is fairly clear, means what it says, and is very comprehensive with respect to the conduct of business. It purposely avoids getting involved with the administrative details of the organization, leaving it up to the founders and members to run things as wisdom dictates.

No, you're quite right. I even had it highlighted in my copy, apparently because I couldn't get it through my head on a prior occasion.

i dunno. Ballot vote seems like pretty much of a "how" to me.

For planning purposes, if nothing else. No other document so clearly conveys the priorities, goals, and values of an organization than an approved budget. You are free to have your budget confer as much or as little authority or limitations as your organization decides is appropriate. RONR doesn't care what decisions you reach, it only requires that you reach them in an orderly and democratic manner. The adoption of an unqualified motion to approve a budget may mean that not enough thought has gone into the process.

That depends entirely on the rules your organization has adopted, as I pointed out above. Is your treasurer authorized to write many checks if they are within the budget? If so, then No, if not, then Possibly.

The background info in that Webster's thing is a not unreasonable starting point, but your organization needs to decide how it will develop, approve, and administer its budgets for itself, by including this info in the bylaws or at least by adopting Standing Rules covering the procedures to be followed. If you have a Finance Committee, and want them to develop a draft budget, set a rule for that. If you want them to hold hearings so committees or members can influence the priorities, put that in. Some groups find that hearings can increase the likelihood that the budget, when up for adoption by the membership, won't draw a lot of amendments, since members know what to expect. It will be up to you how detailed the budget gets at the lower line-item level. I wouldn't necessarily add rules requiring that the draft be presented to the membership x-number of days in advance, unless you're sure you can meet that date--but rule or no rule I would recommend doing it, and with enough lead time that members don't feel blindsided. Like any main motion, it will be subject to amendment when it's pending, and the drafters of the budget should be prepared to answer questions and free to debate the merits of particular items. You should adopt rules regarding who can approve items for payment, as your research suggests. You can decide that all bills that comport with the budget and duly approved by a committee chair, or whomever you authorize will be paid by the Treasurer. This should be reflected in the Treasurer's duties. If you like you can limit such payments to a certain ceiling amount, requiring an individual membership vote prior to payment, even when they fall within the budget. Those are some rough outlines. If you don't feel you have a good framework of rules, task your finance committee with drawing up a draft set of rules, or where necessary bylaws amendments, that are appropriate for your organization. You don't want to hogtie yourself with rules that will bite your nether regions later on, but neither do you want to tempt or test the honesty of those entrusted with your funds. And make sure you have provisions for putting together an audit committee (or if you're a large enough outfit, hiring a CPA) to perform an annual audit of the books, including recommendations for procedural changes that may, with hindsight, be necessary. No, RONR is not a big help in this area, but it does provide the means to get these rules in place, once you've determined what your individual organization needs.

That's true for an election of officers, but not, I believe, in general.

Well, yes, but this particular question was about how it is affected by Sunshine Laws.

Yes; normally a vote is unanimous if there are no dissenting votes. So even if some members are present but abstain a vote could still be called unanimous. But it typically it would not make any difference. A vote that reaches the required threshold for passage is not enhanced in some way by being unanimous.

Nope. At a special meeting, the only matters that can be considered are those that were specifically described in the call of the meeting.

I do not think that the entire structure of the rules would crumble, or even vibrate excessively, but neither do I expect to see such a change in RONR12. 📖 There is something to be said for bringing a postponed matter again before the assembly in a state resembling, as closely as possible, the state it was in at the time it was postponed.

There is a certain irony to the bylaws provision that previous notice is required for a meeting that is defined in the bylaws. RONR does not require a "proper" call for such a meeting, so again this is a dilemma of the society's own making. I could probably be persuaded that, of the two violations, failing to meet on the appointed date was the more serious, but faced with the possibility that the meeting would be considered not properly called, I can understand why they acted as they did.

I am not a lawyer, but if I remember correctly, only the motion having the final effect would be made in public. Nearly all items in exec were considered informally, with amendments typically made by general consent, and it would be highly unlikely for a preamble to exist at all for confidential matters.. The reasons for firing someone would not be stated at all in the resolution, even if it had been in all the papers. So the minutes of executive session were usually brief, e.g. "The board discussed a matter of student discipline." Very often there was no motion arising out of the matter (perhaps one brought up by the Superintendent) since, as long as the Board concurred with the way it was being handled, there was no need for action. Often these sessions were primarily to inform the board of matters that were confidential, but for information only. There was an exception in the case of bullying accusations, which by statute required board action on each one, even if the board approved of the existing disposition.. Those were discussed in exec, and placed on the next public meeting's agenda. But they were not informative. It would say something like: "RESOLVED, that the Anytown Board of Education approves of the actions taken by the Superintendent and the information provided to the Parents/Guardian in the matter labeled S-2019-0008, details on file in the office of the Secretary." As always, your mileage may vary.