Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Gary Novosielski

Members
  • Posts

    15,334
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Gary Novosielski

  1. I don't necessarily disagree. But if that is the right way to read it, I'm still curious what happened to the main motion. And I'm pretty sure you're right about the intent. That's why I believe the chair should be taking a more active role in helping the members phrase such motions properly and in identifying the effect that these motions would have. In this case, it seems that the chair is marginally, if at all, better informed than the average member seems to be. But that can be easily fixed, and should be. This does not sound like one of those cases with people entrenched against doing things according to the rules. It sounds like they'd be quite happy to do things properly, but are just not sure what that is.
  2. Nothing in RONR would prevent the chairman from participating, but depending on the nature of this body (school board?) there may be state regulations that would require the chairman to recuse himself. In some jurisdictions, the son would not be eligible for employment at all. Tell us more about the nature of this <board?>.
  3. I can confidently confirm that 24 is less than 48. If 48 hours prior notice is required, and the rules in RONR apply, no ordinance can be voted on with only 24 hours notice. But as this is a governmental entity, there may be statutes that supersede the rules in RONR. Check with your council's counsel.
  4. And what body is authorized to amend the bylaws? I'm still trying to decode the original question, which sounds like if the assembly passes a bylaws amendment, it has to wait for the assembly to ratify it. Say what-now? Can you clearly delineate which of the meetings you referred to were board meetings, if any, and which are general assembly meetings?
  5. What baffles me is why you think that someone following the rules to the letter should be accused of being discourteous, much less causing such a shock that other members sit in stunned silence rather than making a simple motion to Refer. Courtesy works in both directions. Unless this is a new member who does not know the culture, there could be a reason that the committee chair was not contacted. Perhaps new ideas are not as welcome and encouraged in practice as you believe they should be in theory? And if it is a new member, the shock and outrage is even more inappropriate. If working through the standing committees is as important as it seems, I wonder why you have adopted no rule requiring it. How can a member be blamed for breaking a rule that does not actually exist? And even if the rule did exist, the member would have every right to move the motion in the same way as it was done. All that would be saved is a motion and a vote to refer it. If the committee is going to get its chance to consider this motion, what is the vital need for the committee chair to know a few hours earlier than the actual meeting? What would the chair do differently? Some societies get too enmeshed in doing things perfectly, the way they have "always" been done, rather than concentrating, in this case, on the merits of the new idea that was being proposed. I think it would be valuable to take a step back, and resolve not to become one of those people who find fault as if there were a reward for it.
  6. To answer the final question first, Yes, it's too late to do anything now. But it's also not clear what that "anything" would be. You say that the motion was not postponed, yet no further discussion took place. Why not? What did happen to it? Was the motion then voted on, and if so what was the result? You're right that friendly amendments are not a thing. But neither are friendly postponements. Postponing a motion is not the same as amending it. And postponing applies to all further business on the motion, not just the voting. But there's more. It also appears that the motion to postpone did not specify when it was to be postponed to. That makes this a motion to Postpone Indefinitely which, if adopted, has the effect of killing the motion completely. Nothing friendly about that. But again, we don't know what became of the original main motion. It sounds like the chair should have done a better job of shepherding the motion through this process, but what's done is done, and there's always next time.
  7. As it was moved under New Business, it seems perfectly appropriate. If seconds are required it would need a second, but at that point it would be opened for debate and if anyone thought that it should first be considered by whichever committee we're talking about, all it takes is a motion to Refer it to the committee. That's why such motions exist. No need for anyone to saddle up a high horse. If your society has special rules, as some do, that certain classes of business are automatically referred to certain standing committees, there's still no need to fret. The chair simply states: "It has been moved and seconded that the canopy of the oscillating steam widget be dry cleaned. In accordance with Rule #3, the motion is referred to the Committee on Widgetry for its consideration."
  8. I think you would find an SBA in most states, and in my experience, they are happy to help those considering running for election with questions like this. Some hold seminars with titles like: "So You're Thinking of Running for School Board."
  9. Exactly. The debate on whether changing a comma could materially affect the language can easily dwarf that on whether the comma should just be changed already.
  10. In the normal type of meeting contemplated by RONR, the public is not present and cannot comment before a motion is made, and there are no alternates. So this sounds as though this is some sort of municipal council or similar group with special rules that provide for alternates and their rights at a meeting. Can you shed more light on this scenario?
  11. Improperly removing officers and electing new ones probably violated the bylaws six ways.
  12. Absolutely not. This qualifies as the all-time worst excuse of all time for this week. It's quite likely that the parts that were not discussed were the ones with the most nearly unanimous support. But that's not even the point. The minutes record the exact wording of the motion, as voted on.
  13. Yes. Even so much as a comma requires a motion to amend. There are rules that allow renumbering of paragraphs where something has been inserted, but no changes to the language.
  14. You are incorrect. Being present or verbally accepting a nomination are not required. If it should happen that a person who is not present is elected, then the election is not complete until the person is notified, and does not immediately decline the office. Your rules differ from those in RONR in an important way. They state that to be elected a candidate must receive a majority, not of those present and actually voting, but rather of those present and merely eligible to vote. This makes it impossible to abstain without affecting the result of the election. The vote count necessary to elect, in your rules, is not a majority of ballots cast as would be the case in RONR, but rather of people present. Therefore, an abstention, although technically not a vote, would have the same effect as a vote against all candidates on the ballot. Also, your rules appear to define majority as "at least 51%", while the actual definition is "more than half". Your rules supersede the rules in RONR, where the two do not agree.
  15. No, the president does not resume the office after losing the other election. Once the resignation is accepted, it is irreversible. And the vice-president becomes president for the unexpired remainder of the term, creating a vacancy in the office of vice president. For this reason, it is quite unwise to resign before the results of the election are known.
  16. If I'm reading that right, you were not presiding at the meeting, but were giving the report of a committee. Is that correct?
  17. Do your bylaws actually contain the language "led by the Board"?
  18. If your copy of RONR has numbered Articles, you do not have the 11th edition.
  19. Those links do not link to the actual messages, but rather are links to report those messages for violations.
  20. No, but filling the vacancy certainly would.
  21. RONR uses member to refer to the people who make up a particular body (board, committee, general assembly) with full rights to attend, make motions, speak in debate, and vote. These are the people who count toward a quorum. Other people are non-members, or guests. They may attend with the majority permission of the members, and might also be given permission to speak, as long as no motion is pending. They may not make motions, or speak in debate without a 2/3 vote to suspend the rules. And they may not vote under any circumstances.
  22. If you're referring to days notice: Unless otherwise provided in the bylaws, the number of days is computed by counting all calendar days (including holidays and weekends), excluding the day of the meeting but including the day the notice is sent.
×
×
  • Create New...