Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Gary Novosielski

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Gary Novosielski

  1. On 9/3/2021 at 9:49 PM, Guest Bblack417 said:

    What does Robert's say about the procedure for reconsidering a vote once it has been passed by a majority of the members? Can an item to reconsider a vote simply be added to the agenda by the chairman? Or does it require a vote of the members to add that item to a future meeting for reconsideration?

    No, an item to reconsider a vote cannot simply be made or added by the chair.  A member who voted on the prevailing side (in this case someone who voted Yes) may move to Reconsider (§37) a vote on a motion that passed, at that same meeting.

    If there are no such voters willing to make that motion, or if it is voted down, a motion can be made by anyone to Rescind, or Amend Something Previously Adopted (§35), which can be done at a future meeting, as long as the motion has not already been carried out.

  2. On 9/3/2021 at 7:35 PM, CodeDelphi said:

    I have a group that likes to approve their monthly Treasurer report, which is just a statement of the current amount and any income or expenses. I was under the impression it didn't require a motion to be approved and just needed to be filed. I was told that they allow questions and discussion on the report, that is why it requires a motion.

    My question, does asking questions and allowing for discussion count as action taken? Is that what is meant by action taken? If it doesn't are questions and discussion allowed without the report having to be accepted? Here is where I am getting my information:

    (1) If the report contains only a statement of fact or opinion for the information of the assembly, the
    reporting member makes no motion for its disposal, as there is no necessity for action on the report. But
    if any action is taken, the proper motion, which should be made by some one else, is to "accept the
    report," which has the effect of endorsing the statement and making the assembly assume responsibility
    for it.

    You don't seem to have identified where you got that passage from.  It's not from RONR.  And it's bad advice.

  3. On 9/1/2021 at 10:35 PM, Weldon Merritt said:

    Mr. Novosielski seems to have overlooked that part of your question (or I missed his response to it), so I will answer it. Yes, you must call for nominations for all offices with terms that end this year, whether or not the incumbent is eligible and seeking another term.

    No, I read the question and answered it.  The question was do I need to ask three times.

  4. On 9/4/2021 at 6:01 PM, Tomm said:

    It's worse than just being a Bylaw, it's in the Articles of Incorporation!!!!

    "3. The Directors shall have the power to adopt Bylaws not in conflict with the Articles of Incorporation."

    "4. The Bylaws may be amended, modified, revised, or revoked by the Directors or by the Members. In the event of conflict concerning the Bylaws as amended, modified, revised, or revoked by the Directors, the action of the Members shall prevail." 

    Two points:

    First the Bylaws make it very difficult for the general membership to challenge any of their decisions.

    Second, item 4 states "In the event of conflict concerning the Bylaws as amended, modified, revised, or revoked by the Directors, the action of the Members shall prevail."  but it doesn't appear that the Members can challenge the adoption of a new Bylaw as stated in item 3? Is that how you would read it?

    Bottom line: We're screwed!


    Even if that's true, it appears that the Members can amend that change out of existence, and can't be countermanded.

  5. No, the "three times" thing is nonsense, but I've heard it before.  Where it comes from I have no idea.  I suppose it's possible that it's in your bylaws, but it's certainly not anywhere in RONR.

    Yes, you can ask once, and after a reasonable pause for replies, move on.  "Hearing none, nominations for Secretary are closed." 

    But if anyone then says "Hey that was too fast I wanted to nom..."  just acknowledge them and allow them to make a nomination.  Voting to (re)open nominations takes a majority vote, and voting to close them takes a 2/3 vote, if it comes to that.

    You say you are running the nomination process of that meeting, which I take to mean that you are not the normal presiding officer.  Is there a reason why the normal presiding officer is not performing that duty?

  6. On 8/16/2021 at 6:00 PM, Daniel H. Honemann said:

    In my opinion, if 15 of your members call a special meeting for one or more purposes, your Management Committee does not have the right to add any item or items of business to the item or items of business specified by the 15 members calling this meeting.

    I agree with @Daniel H. Honemann.  While RONR does not prohibit combining such business into one meeting, doing so would have to be acceptable to both groups.  The Management Committee can't force its way in.

  7. On 8/28/2021 at 6:54 PM, Guest Dave said:

    1.  Did the president’s actions invalidate the vote? There’s a small faction of super petty individuals who want to impede the will of the general membership and continually weaponize Robert’s Rules.

    Weaponizing is one thing.  Making up rules that don't exist is another.  The president did nothing that would invalidate the vote.  If they think it it did, ask them for the citation.

  8. On 8/30/2021 at 6:54 PM, Guest Eric said:

    Could you explain how it would still be applicable? For more context we are a small school board which also uses Roberts rules for small boards. Which i'm trying to also find buy a pdf of RONR that I can download now. Thank you everyone for your help on this. 

    RONR is not available as a pdf, but it is available in Kindle form, as is RONRIB ((Robert's) Rules of Order Newly Revised--In Brief) 3rd ed.

  9. On 8/29/2021 at 7:42 PM, Guest Sandra l said:

    So, this could be a vote by the board, would this affect all board minutes, even future minutes, or would they need vote separately each time minutes were challenged? 

    Reading and approval of minutes happens at the beginning of each regular meeting.  If there are corrections offered that anyone objects to, then a vote is taken, and the correction is either agreed to, or not.

  10. Another question, perhaps a line or two above the bottom, is the issue of electronic voting, which is only allowed if your bylaws permit it, and yet another question is how a chair can possibly "rule" anything outside of a meeting.

    RONR has a notice requirement which says that notice must be provided a "reasonable" time in advance.  The definition of reasonable is left up to you.  So you cannot argue that since the bylaws are silent, no notice is required.  RONR says it is required.  What you can debate is whether one hour is a "reasonable" time.

    I think there may be a difference between moving the time of the meeting to start earlier, as opposed to later.  Suppose a meeting was changed to an hour earlier.  Members could argue that they had plans that could not be canceled on an hour's notice.  But if they say they could not make a meeting that was to start an hour late, are they saying that if they did attend, they would need to leave after an hour?  


  11. On 8/29/2021 at 11:28 AM, Guest answer said:

    The information I gave about the Chief was just to put the question in context. My issue is really about how the board handled the motion, then their actions the following day. We are having what the board is calling an "emergency meeting" to discuss replacing the chief this Tuesday. I want to have as much information as possible to be able to question their actions.  Thank you for your input. 

    If I have followed the details of what occurred, which can be iffy, the Chief's resignation was never accepted, and so the Chief is still the Chief.

    Apparently someone tried to move not to accept the resignation, which was an incorrect motion, since not doing something is essentially the same as doing nothing, i.e.,  the resignation would not be accepted whether the motion passed or failed.  The proper motion would be to accept the resignation, and if you were opposed to doing so, to vote No on that motion.  And New Business would be the proper time to do so.

    But as no motion was ever considered, the resignation was never accepted, and the resignation could be withdrawn, if it should please the Chief to do so.


  12. On 8/17/2021 at 4:56 PM, Richard Brown said:

    I tend to agree with Mr. Merritt that the president for life has already been designated. From a parliamentary standpoint, I believe it is permissible to do so. However, since the interpretation is a statute is involved, you really need advice from an attorney in your area on that issue. 

    It's president for more than just life, unless the Founding President has the foresight to resign before shuffling off this mortal coil.

  13. On 8/17/2021 at 4:35 PM, Jay M said:

    In our not for profit organization's special  General body meeting for an approval of a  project a presentation was made by the committee chair explaining  the design and the cost of the project. Even before conclusion of the presentation a motion was moved by member " I move to vote it down the whole project" and it was seconded. The chair allowed it for discussion.

    My question is Was motion  in proper format? What happens if the motion was failed? Does  another motion need to approve the project?

    Thanks in advance

    I would not agree that a motion was moved by a member, since the presentation was not completed, and the member was apparently not recognized.  So all we have is a member shouting out some random words during a presentation.  The chair should caution the member not to interrupt the speaker, and ignore the seconding member.

    And as others have noted, a negative motion is not appropriate.  What should happen is that when the reporting member completes the presentation, he should move the adoption of the proposal, and that is the motion before the assembly.  The rude person who was against the proposal should then seek recognition and debate against the adoption of the motion, and when the vote is taken, would presumably vote against it.

  14. On 8/22/2021 at 4:43 PM, Guest Beatrice Binsky said:

    Are committee reports part of the meeting and entered into the minutes.  Our president wants them in good and welfare which are not included in the minutes.  What is right?

    Committee reports are normally in writing, and are filed, perhaps with the minutes, but they are not usually included in the minutes.  They are not part of Good of the Order, but should occur earlier in the meeting, especially since they may contain recommendations, or recommended motions.

    The proper placement according to RONR is: immediately after Reading and Approval of Minutes, under the heading Reports of Officers, Boards, and Standing Committees.  Reports of Special (ad hoc) Committees would come immediately after that.

    See: RONR (12th ed.) 41:5 et seq.

  15. On 8/22/2021 at 7:53 PM, Greggg said:

    Than k you for your reply.

    The plan would be to do this as a Special Resolution at this November's AGM - whether that's online again this year under the emergency order or in person if the order is lifted.

    I get the confusion over the different names.  There are a minimum of 10 Directors and four Flag Officers.  Together they are defined as the Executive Directors.  Bylaw 6:

    6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS:  The Executive Directors of the Club shall be elected at the Annual General Meeting for a period of one year and consist of four flag officers and a minimum of ten other members, one of whom shall be the Immediate Past Commodore 

    The Flag officers are defined elsewhere.

    The intention of this is to hold electronic meetings only in emergency situations where it is physically impossible to meet in person and Istill be able to conduct business.  If the meeting to decide to hold an electronic meeting has to be done in person, then there really is no point to all this.

    Our hope was to have the 4 Flag Officers (or whoever) call an online meeting and then have the entire executive approve it at that (online) meeting.


    It would be a good idea, in my view, to avoid using the word Executive as a noun, especially when it refers to more than one person.  Since it is an adjective, it should be followed by a noun to which it refers:  Executive board, executive director, executive session, executive committee, executive decision, executive secretary, or what have you.  

    Since RONR does not use Executive as the name of a body, it makes it hard to fit this into the existing rules.

  16. On 8/23/2021 at 11:29 AM, Weldon Merritt said:

    I agree with Mr. Honemann (which I generally do if I know what's good for me). The lesson to be learned is when and how to appeal from the ruling of the chair

    And just as important is knowing the rules to begin with, so that you can recognize a bad ruling when you see one.

    In this case the chair might have been confused about motions that originate in committees.  Such motions do not require a second, but they are just as debatable as any other motion.

  • Create New...