Gary Novosielski

Bylaws are an area where paraphrases have repeatedly been found to be of little no value.

There is no such thiing as voting to elect "a slate" of candidates. It may be that the nominating committee is only charged with providing one nominee for each office, but if the rules in RONR apply, the chair must call for further nominations from the floor, and if the election must be held by ballot, write-in votes are acceptable. In any case, any candidates for any election have the right to cast votes for themselves. I would be hesitant to vote for anyone who would abstain on his own election In the few times I have seen it done, usually on a second ballot, it was taken as a sign equivalent to withdrawing from nomination.

It looks as though election by acclamation is possible in this case, but I haven't seen anything to suggest that the chair actually pronounced the member elected. If not, the chair should do so at the outset of the next meeting, and all the other questions go away.

Because reports of officers and committtees, sanding or select, are part of the standard order of business, I consider them business. Since this was a special meeting, the business to be conducted must be specified in the call, so presuming that the receiving of this report was germane to that business, as I presume it was, it would be part of the business to be conducted. But I still see no justification for entertaining it in the absence of a quorum.

Ì have always interpreted the term "set from time to time" as indicating that the action could be repeated as deemed necessary by means of an ordinary main motion. I would not think it necessary to limit the time with some expiration date. Having set the dues, the dues have been set, the motion has been fully completed and the dues would remain set at that level until they are set again.

Hearing reports is not among the exceptions allowed for inquorate meetings. That should be reason enough, but if pressed, I would guess it is because hearing reports is not a measure to obtain a quorum.

No, a chair pro tem would only have power when the chair is absent. Having a brief recess does not count as being absent. Like the others, I am curious how you would even have a chair pro tem if the meeting was chaired by the regular chair.

...and we appreciate your question, but please do not type in ALL CAPS.

It may have been their intention that this committee was always to meet in Executive [closed] Session (§9) but nothing in the procedure that was used appears to have accomplished this. Merely putting "Executive" in the title doesn't invoke any rules that make it different from any other committee. Presumably, however, the committee could adopt a motion to go into executive session at each of its meetings, but if they have a duty to notify when and where committees meet they would still need to do that. People could show up, but would need to leave as soon as the motion to go into executive session was adopted. I'm presuming that in the case of other committees, general members are permitted, by rule or custom, to attend. If by rule, it would be in your bylaws; RONR does not afford any such right. Also look in your bylaws for any rules that require committees to give notice of the reason they are going into closed session, or limiting the nature of business that may be discussed there. RONR has no such rules.

The only snag I can see, apart from the question of whether a motion was properly adopted, is this section: The language says that one committee member shall be a member of the board. It does not say at least one; it does not say no more than one. I suppose a point could be raised that a committee consisting only of board members is not properly constituted.

Regular meetings don't need to be called because everyone presumably knows when they are held. In RONR the words special meeting and called meeting are synonymous.

In any case, the changes cannot simply be made by the parliamentarian without a vote¹ of the membership, unless some very unusual provisions are to be found in your existing rules. __________ ¹ Including the opportunity to debate and amend the proposed changes.

The member is incorrect. Motions take effect immediately upon the announcement by the chair that the motion has been adopted, except in the case where a motion contains a proviso delaying its effective date until some future time or contingency. Approval of minutes has no bearing on the situation. Ask the member for a citation in RONR supporting his claim. He will be unable to provide one.

That's what I thought I said until I re-read it and discovered that apparently I only said it my head.

The word normally suggests to me only that since the majority of societies would qualify as ordinary societies, to which the rule does apply, it would be safe to say that the rule would normally apply. It would not apply in those instances where express provisions to the contrary exist, but that is not the norm. The rule does not use the word must, but it does say that the practice is followed except where the bylaws provide otherwise, and that seems unambiguous.

I agree that the president cannot nominate himself (or anyone) in anticipation of a vacancy that has not yet occurred.

Some organizations, by rule or custom, establish the minimum number of oars in the water that shall be required.

I think it would fall under the requirements for requesting leave to read papers.

Rather than attempting to control the distribution of the ballots, I believe the most reliable method is to establish a polling location with a ballot box, and as each member approaches the polling place, their name is checked off against the membership list, their ballot is verified as having been folded twice, and is then placed in the ballot box. I would suggest that an accurate and up-to-date membership list is absolutely essential to any properly conducted ballot vote.

Putting aside for a moment the question of whether or the board can appoint in the event of an incomplete election, it seems clear that if the board is empowered to appoint, it is not empowered to appoint anyone who is ineligible. It also appears that the only person willing to serve is ineligible due to term limits in the bylaws, so I agree with Mr. Brown that this would not seem to solve anything.

I think no more than a point of order would be necessary.

That would apply to filling a vacancy in an unexpired term. But it appears that what you have here is an incomplete election, and the remedy for incomplete elections is to complete them.

"Legal" isn't something we get involved in. The minutes will note how each member voted if a roll-call vote was ordered on the motion. If the vote was not a roll-call but some sort of counted vote, then only the vote counts in favor and against are noted in the minutes. If a non-counted vote such as a rising vote, show of hands (not counted) or a voice vote, then only the fact that it was approved or rejected is noted in the minutes.

No, you have to follow your bylaws. If nobody is willing to do the job, then you can amend the bylaws to remove that term restriction, or to eliminate the office completely, or to disband the organization entirely, which may be wise if nobody cares enough about it to help out.

Ban you from what? If you're not a member, you're pretty much banned from exercising any of the rights of membership already.