Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Steven Britton

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Steven Britton

  • Birthday 02/03/1956

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Montrose, Michigan 48457
  • Interests
    Professional Registered Parliamentarian. Second vice-president of the Michigan Association of NAP, president of the Michigan Unit of Registered Parliamentarians and treasure of the Genesee Area Unit of Parliamentarians My interest in the subject corresponds to my family's participation in the sport of pure-bred dogs.

Recent Profile Visitors

1,168 profile views
  1. Our church is incorporated in a state that requires in-person meetings unless electronic means are established in our bylaws, which bylaws are silent on such and require we follow the latest edition of Roberts Rules secondarily. Do you have a parliamentary question? Your preface is framing a legal question. You may consider asking a lawyer whether your state is under an executive order that allows you to do meet by electronic means.
  2. Question for the OP: What type of organization is this?
  3. My concern is with the length of the period that defines the majority of meetings is undefined by the information provided. If the definition of a majority is more than half, half of what? Hence, if one of Gov. Cuomo's executive order nullifies this bylaw, there is no restriction from meeting electronically. Again, you need to speak with a lawyer and not a parliamentarian regarding applicability of the New York governor's executive order.
  4. Strictly, speaking, the citation you've provided only provides for regular meetings to be held by electronic means, and a majority of the regular meetings are required to be held in person. However, you should contact a lawyer to review and interpret Governor Cuomo's various Executive Orders to determine how they apply to your particular non-profit organization. My only question is what did your organization intend by stating a majority of meetings (majority of what)?
  5. Tim Wynn, PRP, gave an excellent presentation at the NAP Leadership Conference, which in-part, explained the section/paragraph number citation.
  6. In state statute, many states restrict voting by email by providing for taking action outside of a meeting through Unanimous Written Consent. You should contact a lawyer whether email voting is permitted in your jurisdiction.
  7. If RONR controls, if draft minutes are circulated to board members prior to the meeting where they will be approved, yes, the director is permitted to see the draft minutes. However, RONR does not require the circulation of draft minutes prior to their approval. If the minutes are not circulated prior to a meeting amongst members of the board, RONR requires there reading prior to approval.
  8. Laura, as Mr. Mervosh mentioned, RONR doesn't concern itself with audience comment at meetings of public governmental bodies. The answer is likely to be found in your state's version of its public open meetings act, or perhaps in your state's attorney general's rulings. Either way, the RONR forum doesn't dispense legal advise. You're better served by speaking with an attorney.
  9. According to RONR, as long as the recommendation of the committee was acted on by majority vote at the committee's meeting, the answer is yes. If the committee hasn't met, their report to the assembly can only contain what all committee members have agreed too. See the footnote on p.499, p. 503 (line 24 - 28) and p. 97-99 (concerning electronic meetings).
  10. You need to provide more detailed information regard your use of the term, executive meeting. Off hand, it could describe your board of directors entered into a closed or secret session, or it could mean a meeting of an executive committee, which is best described as a board within a board. To do the latter example, it would need to be prescribed in the bylaws.
  11. Fair enough, but normally, it's unusual that a small board would list good of the order in an order of business, but it could. After conclusion and before adjournment, the presider should nonetheless inquire if there is any further business to be brought before the assembly. There is nothing in the reference on p. 362 which prohibits the introduced of further new business prior to the meeting's adjournment.
  12. Yes, it's called new business. No, it's called new business.
  13. Why does it only take a majority vote to give a non-member the privilege to speak in debate, if no motion is pending? I'm thinking that this can only occur by suspending a rule of order, which can only occur by suspending rules in the parliamentary authority, and requires a two-thirds vote. It can't be accomplished by applying Limit or Extend Limits on Debate (as an incidental main motion).
  14. I don't believe it's a matter of absentee rights. The matter corresponds to an officer's duty, which in this case is performed outside of a meeting by the secretary, and can only be carried out by the officer. I don't believe the poster's personal email to all members somehow suffices to provide relief from the explicit requirement that the notice be announced in the meeting's call. If time permits, the secretary could also issue a revised call and provide the notice by using any mode of allowable transmittal.
  • Create New...