Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Rob Elsman

Members
  • Content Count

    2,795
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Tulsa, Oklahoma

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Matters of California state law need to be taken up with an attorney who is familiar with it.
  2. I beg everyone's pardon. I did not notice the age of the original post and thought I was just answering the question that was being asked. It would be helpful if folks would ask new questions on new topics. 🙃
  3. The "then what" in the last question is best answered by noting that the assembly has expressed its best judgment in sustaining the ruling of the chair with the Appeal. Hopefully, this judgment was arrived at after persuasive and illuminate debate (Parliamentary Law). The matter is closed; presumably, the correct interpretation of the bylaw has been arrived at. There is no further "conflict". Those who are on the losing side have an obligation to accept the decision "gracefully" and move along "cheerfully".
  4. Mr. Martin's reply certainly was better than mine, and I agree with it entirely. I just let him do all the typing. 😊
  5. Thinking a little further, don't homeowners associations usually have a one unit, one vote rule instead of one man, one vote?
  6. Theoretically, a bylaw could be adopted that would interfere with a fundamental principle of parliamentary law. It is beyond me, however, why anyone would propose such a thing.
  7. Mr. Kapur, Reconsider and Enter on the Minutes keeps a temporary majority from reversing the adoption of the main motion upon reconsideration. I think Mr. Gerber's reply was very clever and does exactly what would need to be done, though the main motion is in suspense until the next meeting. I have to admit--I have never once made a motion to Reconsider and Enter on the Minutes. It does not seem to be on my radar
  8. Unless the adopted agenda assigned the hour at which to adjourn, the completion of the adopted order of business for the meeting would leave the assembly in the same position it would be in if it had no order of business at all. In this case, any business of any class could be brought before the assembly without permission, provided previous notice were not required. The proper way to prevent the introduction of further business would be the adoption of a motion to Adjourn.
  9. The chair should assist the maker to re-frame the motion as a motion to Rescind.
  10. I think the example George gave us applied to a main motion that had been previously adopted. The example is to postpone indefinitely the adopted main motion. This is just confusing and old-fashioned. The modern way to rescind a previously adopted main motion is to make a motion to Rescind. Kiss the General's example good-bye.
  11. George, I think the example General Robert provided is obsolete and deprecated. Things change.
  12. He does, indeed, but, for purposes of the modern common parliamentary law, I think such a motion should be re-framed as a motion to Rescind and treated accordingly.
  13. Because Postpone Indefinitely is used to kill a main motion, it makes a certain kind of sense to me that there would not be a corresponding incidental main motion.
  14. It is your rule, and/or you tell us.
×
×
  • Create New...