Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

DebbieinFL

Members
  • Posts

    32
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by DebbieinFL

  1. Our society just elected a trustee to serve as the third member of our Constitution and Bylaws Committee, not because the person is a trustee but because the person asked to serve and no one seemed to object. In that same meeting, the society also asked said Committee to study the section dealing with Trustees to clarify some questions that had arisen in the last few months. I was wondering if the trustee should recuse himself from working on any changes to the section since it would currently involve him personally. I read this quote below in another discussion thread and wondered if the principle would apply to this scenario I've outlined. Thank you. "... If a member has a direct personal or pecuniary (monetary) interest in a motion under consideration not common to other members, the rule in RONR is that the member should not vote on such a motion, but even then he or she cannot be compelled to refrain from voting. [RONR (12th ed.) 45:4.]"
  2. Our society votes for elected positions by casting ballots. The Nominating Committee members gather the ballots and are charged with tallying them and reporting the count. Can business continue being conducted by the society while those votes are tallied or do we pause until they're finished counting, as though the motion isn't completely finished until the count is complete? Thanks.
  3. Thank you! Yes, that summary clarifies things for me. I appreciate all the help.
  4. Thank you for replying. My latter confusion was two-fold: in reference to whether this meeting would fall under the "subsequent meeting" instruction of pp. 501 if a meeting is improperly called are the decisions made binding at all But if it's determined that this is "a dead horse," then I understand and will ask no more.
  5. I am confused by various of the last replies. Mr. Brown, I explained above that we were dealing with a particular issue. So may I please ask your opinions about my last two comments are? Others would be, of course, welcomed as well. Thank you
  6. A chair does not have veto power, true. BUT, the chair calls subsequent meetings, right? If the meeting was not properly called it's not a meeting, it's a gathering, right? And at a gathering decisions are not binding, right? Mr. Brown - our committee met initially to discuss a particular issue and determine a course of action. We had adjourned with action items and knowing we might have to meet again to finalize actions to be taken regarding the issue. We had been emailing opinions back and forth which got so cumbersome that it was decided we would need to meet physically again and that's the meeting I was trying to coordinate when a committee member took over determining a place and time of his convenience without consulting me.
  7. Thank you all for your replies. In summary, this is my take away based on your discussions given the information I've tried to supply: A complete reading of my committee's emails would prove beyond reasonable doubt that a clear and constant, not drawn out, back and forth discussion in determining a date for a meeting convenient to all was being carried on. The phrase of "fail to call a meeting" (p.499) would not make sense to me, as one reply read, in the middle of trying to set up a meeting. In addition, the issue we were dealing with was a continuation of a previous meeting so the clause in pg. 501 would also seem to apply. So my conclusion, to be sent as an email to my committee, is that the calling of that meeting by said members would be classified as improperly called. With that said (and I didn't know whether this should be a separate thread) ...., within an improperly called/convened/attended meeting, what happens to or what is to be done with any decisions made there? We had been tasked with deciding about a bylaw amendment. What if those that gathered at that meeting came up with language for the bylaw amendment, prepared a plan to present the bylaw amendment to our parent organization, and started to execute that plan in spite of my objections?
  8. We are a standing committee. The first meeting for purposes of the current issue we were discussing was November 6th. There have been multiple emails regarding thoughts about the issues and members agreed that we needed to meet. Emails were being exchanged during this past weekend (Nov. 30-Dec. 5) to set up a convenient meeting Dec. 6 I received the notification that a meeting was being called at a so-so time and place by a committee member.
  9. This is kind of the question. RONR says "fails to call a meeting." It doesn't say refuses to call or is slow in calling a meeting, just that he fails to do so. Where is the interpretation of he's "failed" to do it? When a committee member thinks the chair is too slow? In my case, I was in the middle ofemails trying to determine a time. My original question is whether I "failed" to call a meeting.
  10. Thank you for the exact wording. So the words "won't for any reason" are added - hyperbole maybe? Still, would you say that I as chair would be charged with "fails to call a meeting" while I'm working on calling a meeting?
  11. I am the Chairman of a standing committee (Bylaws, mind you), with 3 other members and our committee has been working on an issue. We had met once and since then had had some communications via email. It was too burdensome to continue large email threads so I had been working on setting a time and place for another face to face meeting to continue our work. In the midst of getting feedback from members, one of the committee member chose to set up a time and place for a meeting on his own, contacted the other committee members about it. I told him privately that the meeting would not work for me one due to illness and second due to a conflict with another meeting within our organization which I am a part of as well. Said member replied that he had already contacted the other members and that I could simply send in my opinions via email or I could call via speakerphone. I replied that I was the chairman, that this meeting would be set up when I could facilitate it, hopefully, as my illness would allow, in 4-5 days. The following was the reply I received: " It is not true you are the “one” who can call a meeting. If for any reason the chair won’t call a meeting, two members of the committee can according to Robert’s Rule, and a quorum of the committee must be present to conduct business" I don't believe those are the right words in RONR, more like a paraphrase with some added verbiage. But considering that I was in the midst of planning a meeting, maybe not as fast as this member wanted, would I be in violation of said rule? Thank you.
  12. The members are elected to 3 year terms and no set number who serve is listed.
  13. Hello. We have a committee that is setup per bylaws whose members are elected to operate in a rotating basis. The bylaws say that "one-third of the members are to rotate off" and one year must pass before they can be nominated again. We are considering some bylaw changes because that committee has unfortunately not been setup recently in sets of 3 and we are having difficulty getting people to accept working on the committee. One of the the proposed changes is to add the word "approximately one-third." I am wondering the effect of adding that word would have - how do you determine "approximately" when it comes to people? Shouldn't the bylaws be clear without rounding off errors? Thank you!
×
×
  • Create New...