Gary Novosielski

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.

On 1/9/2017 at 0:39 PM, Guest Anne said:

In a brief recess called by the chair can a pro tem take control of the meeting if he/she felt the recess was against the rules?

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:

2 hours ago, Guest DCaldwell said:

SECTION 2. Each Committee shall have a minimum of Three (3) members, of which One (1) member shall be a member of the BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

(emphasis added)

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.

On 1/6/2017 at 7:35 PM, Guest Sharon said:

Not really referring to a special meeting but a regular board meeting.

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.

On 1/7/2017 at 0:53 PM, Josh Martin said:

I don't see any problem, as a general rule, with a known vacancy being filled in advance. If a resignation is submitted and accepted, but the resignation does not take effect until a later date, it seems entirely appropriate for the person or assembly empowered to fill the vacancy to do so in advance of the effective date. The appointment will, of course, not take effect until the resignation is effective.

The issue here is that the vacancy does not exist until after the President leaves office. Therefore, he is attempting to fill a vacancy which should rightly be filled by his successor.

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. 

13 hours ago, Shmuel Gerber said:

If it's you going on vacation, how is it that I'm the one paddling a rowboat?

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

13 hours ago, Guest Morris said:

Can results of survey be presented as part  of rationale during discussion about the motion? 

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.

16 minutes ago, Richard Brown said:

I agree.  I don't see anything about co-chairs or vice chairs either.  It appears to me the president can appoint chairmen, but not co-chairs or vice chairs.  However, if that is their custom, I suppose they can continue it until a motion or rule is adopted to the contrary.

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.

52 minutes ago, Guest Tracey said:

Can a Club that follows the Roberts Rules of Order ban you even if you are not a member?

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

35 minutes ago, Guest Linda said:

Yes

Your former VP is now president.  You now have a vacancy in the office of vice president, unless you've already filled it.

The former president can only become president again in the same way any other member might become president, such as being elected next time.

I don't see anything there about co-chairs.  If that's correct, then you haven't got any.

Voting by e-mail is not permitted under the rules in RONR, unless your bylaws provide that it is, and since you have no bylaws, I suspect that's not the case.

Also, if the rules in RONR apply, you cannot specify in advance that the membership's only options are to approve or reject the bylaws.  The membership has the right to debate and amend motions on the floor, refer them to a committee, and a variety of other options.