Rob Elsman

As to what the board can legally do, I think you need the assistance of an attorney.

The assembly can adopt a main motion at the beginning of the meeting to the effect that the meeting shall adjourn when the orders of the day have been disposed of. For the "short and sweet" summary of the motion, take a look at RONR (12th ed.) t6, motion 3. Otherwise, since, as you say, there is no other rule in operation, the whole thing about the three days and such is just a barrel-full of baloney.

You didn't even get to choose your own switch. 😁

If RONR (12th ed.) is the club's parliamentary authority, the "who" and "how" of the assignment of items of business to their proper places in the established order of business is remarkably well defined. Although many find the section a difficult read, in my opinion, it is likely the best written section in the book on account of its concise language and its compact style. Take a look at RONR (12th ed.) §41.

I have no idea what this means. It sounds officious, but it doesn't ring a bell in terms of proper parliamentary procedure.

An assembly that meets quarterly should not be using an agenda, much less an agenda dictated by the presiding officer. The established order of business should be followed. It is perfectly proper for the presiding officer to prepare for himself a memorandum laying out the assigned order for calling up items of business, but this memorandum is not binding to the extent that it deviates from the proper order of business under the rules. So, if the memorandum contains a mistake or omission, the rules prevail. Because I know from experience on this forum how frequently groups get into trouble through the misuse of the agenda, I strongly urge ordinary societies that meet frequently and for which the standard order of business is practical to drop the use of the agenda and use the standard order of business as the established order of business.

I don't get this original motion thing. What is not disposed of is the main motion, as amended. I don't get this fascination with the original form of the main motion. What gives?

Add to what? Do you prepare the memorandum for the president to use to call up the items of business in their proper order?

😂 😝

Yes, the chair should call up the item of business at the time assigned for unfinished business in the established order of business. If he fails to call it up in its proper place, any member may interrupt to make the privileged motion, Call for the Orders of the Day, to have it called up.

You can reach the conclusion by deduction. For example, the use of ballots for voting through the mail violates the fundamental principle of parliamentary law that voting is limited to those who are actually present at a meeting, RONR (12th ed.) 45:56. In RONR (12th ed.) 45:57, we read, "...when authorized in the bylaws", not when authorized in a special rule of order; therefore, a bylaw is necessary to overcome the interference of the fundamental principle of parliamentary law. A special rule of order will not do.

I think both Mr. Katz and I understand that the subsidiary motion, Amend, was adopted. That is beyond controversy. What is still up in the air is whether a vote was taken on the main motion, as amended. I sounds like to me like this did not happen. If I'm right, the main motion, as amended, has not been properly disposed of. It remains for the assembly to take up the main motion, as amended, and vote on it. It is a plausible scenario for a subsidiary motion, Amend, to be adopted, but the pending main motion, as amended, to be rejected.

Yes, Mr. Katz and I are having difficulty determining what was the disposition of the main motion, as amended. As far as I can tell from the facts given, it was not disposed of, in which case it should be called up as Unfinished Business at the next regular meeting occurring within the quarterly time interval. Mr. Katz seems to think the main motion, as amended, was put to a vote, but I cannot determine from the information provided why he thinks that.

Was a vote taken on the main motion, as amended? If it was, I missed it.

The assembly is free to do what it wishes. If it wishes to reject the adopted subsidiary motion, Amend, upon reconsideration, and adopt the original form of the pending main motion, it may certainly do so. On the other hand, it is free to adopt or reject the main motion, as amended. It all depends on what the assembly wishes to do.

No, it is incorrect to say that the original form of a pending main motion "dies" upon adoption of a subsidiary motion, Amend.

After the subsidiary motion, Amend, is adopted, the main motion, as amended, is pending before the assembly. The original form of the main motion can be brought back before the assembly by rejecting the previously adopted subsidiary motion upon reconsideration.

The time within which the announced results of an election can be contested is discussed specifically in RONR (12th ed.) 46:49. Note that the period of time within which the contest may be raised varies, depending on the grounds upon which the contest is based. In cases where no continuing breach of the rules is involved, the expiration of the limited time within which a contest must be raised imposes a duty on all the members of the electing body to graciously accept the results and move forward collectively to pursue the objectives of the organization. Continuous contention and disaffection by those whose preferred choices did not win is unacceptable.

May I get hold of a bottle?

I doubt the betting money would agree. 🤔

It all sounds very officious--all that "broughting forth" and "moving to move forward". On closer examination, not a single person involved knows the first thing about parliamentary procedure. Maybe the best reference to the book would be RONR (12th ed.). The whole book.

It is, indeed, possible to make an incidental main motion to postpone an item of business and make it a general order of the day or a special order of the day. Such a motion requires a second; is debatable; and is amendable. It requires a majority vote for adoption when the item of business will be made a general order; however, it requires a two-thirds vote when the item of business will be made a special order. Read RONR (12th ed.) 10:4-7 very carefully. As to when and why a two-thirds vote is required, see RONR (12th ed.) 10:8, Standard Characteristic 7, item (b).

While we're at it, the same thing applies when a main motion has been referred to a committee. The main motion, and any adhering motions that also went to committee, are returned to the referring body in the same form as they were originally referred. Any of the committee's recommendations to modify these motions are kept separate in the report.

It does, indeed, sound like the proper answer is heavily colored by the statutes or regulations of the state having jurisdiction. As to "continually" speaking on the same topics, an executive board that permits non-members of the board to attend and make comments at board meetings may limit the subjects that can be raised in the comments; or, the chair may rule that the comments are not germane to the business at hand and are not in order; or, the chair may rule that the comments are dilatory and are not in order.

In the end, I think the reason the proceedings were very confusing (not just for the original poster, but for me, too) was that the assembly members do not have sufficient training to handle an election properly. So, let me ask some of my standard questions. 1. Have all the members purchased and studied carefully Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised In Brief (3rd ed.)? This smallish book is designed specifically for members who want to quickly get up to speed on how to participate effectively in meetings. 2. Does the organization provide "bootcamp" education on proper parliamentary procedure and behavioral etiquette to new members to enable them to participate effectively in meetings? 3. Does the organization provide continuing education on relevant topics of parliamentary procedure? For example, ahead of each election cycle, is there a refresher course for members concerning election procedures? 4. Has the presiding officer purchased and studied carefully Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (12th ed.)? This largish book is indispensable for the presiding officer to carry out his duties properly. Together with a copy of the bylaws and any special rules of order, the presiding officer must have a copy of the book at hand at every meeting. In the back of the book, there are tables and lists that will help the presiding officer obtain answers to many immediate questions "on the fly", as it were. 5. Does the organization provide special training for newly elected officers on the duties and authorities of each office, as discussed in RONR (12th ed.)? Does the organization provide special training for a newly elected presiding officer (and those who might have to take the chair temporarily) on the tips for effective presiding? 6. Does the organization have a standing committee on rules, part of the function of which is to promote, by various appropriate means, proper parliamentary procedure and effective meeting style?