J. J.

You might also look at Decorum in Debate, pp. 391-96.

As a practical matter, I doubt that the minutes can be foisted on an unwilling majority. In this case, there would be sufficient votes to "suspend the rules and require the chair to put the approval of the minutes up to a vote." I am not thrilled with the possibility, but it is a possibility. I do agree that minutes need to be approved, with appropriate corrections, if any.

You could say the same for some doctors, lawyers, accountants, or mechanics.

Say you are a parliamentarian. If you are interested in becoming credentialed, contact either or both the National Association of Parliamentarians and the American Institute of Parliamentarians.

Would it be possible to introduce the bylaw amendments at the meeting, but refer it to a committee to report back at a specific meeting?

Well, first the board may not have the authority to remove anyone. Second, you will look completely heartless if you raise the question, unless the person's action is disruptive.

Are you talking about removed from the meeting or from the board? Someone crying loudly, wailing, could violate decorum, if it disturbs the assembly (p. 394, ll.12-22).

Strictly under RONR, when used, an agenda is adopted by the body, i.e. the City Council (p. 372). Mayors are not mentioned in RONR.

First, there is not a right to speak in debate. Secondly, a rule in the nature of a rule of order within the bylaws may be suspended (p. 17, ll.19-27).

I will take what looks like the minority view. The ability to speak in debate is not a "basic right of an individual member." If it were, it could not curtailed by a 2/3 vote (see p. 264, ll. 6-12). The rules relating to debate are clearly rules in the nature of a rule of order, as deal with the orderly transaction of business within a meeting. Even if in the bylaws, that rule may be suspended, for as long as the duration of the session. The second rule, ""Meetings of the Board: All meetings of the Board, excluding Executive Session, shall be open and video recorded with time allotted for Members to make comments" does not deal with debate. It requires a time to be allotted for members to speak. This is not attached to a particular pending question. A time can be allotted at the start of of the meeting, or at the end; there is no guidance on what that time is.

Wouldn't that prevent adopting the Previous Question?

Maybe he just got confused, Burke.

In a committee, the punishment may limited to ordering the member from the room.

The correct approach would be to order nonmember to leave. Your decision would be subject to appeal. Should to nonmember refuse, call the police, and be prepared to to file charges.

Under RONR, yes in terms of accepting the resignation. The resignation doesn't become effective until accepted (p. 291). The appointment, however, may create a problem.

Then either you have mistyped the number or the ballot is void. At least 28 more ballots than voters were cast.

Would be of the ballots cast, with at least one vote? (I don't think it would make a difference in this case.)

There were a total of 50 voters; how did Candidate 1 get 78 votes?

The second was so nice, he said it twice.

I agree that full video conferencing works better, though audio only is workable. Neither is easy and requires modification of the standard rules.

Some of that can be handled with good audio/video devices. The votes can be tallied separately, if there are 3-4 specific locations.

I have some success, with international organization, but the technology and rules must be adapted for it to work.

Under RONR, the precise language governs, i.e. a vote of the majority of the entire membership is different than a majority vote of the members. Based on that, I would have to go with a 2/3 vote of the trustees choosing to cast a vote, excluding the member being removed. If there 7 members at the meeting, including the member being removed, there are 6 members that can vote; if all six vote four would be needed o remove. If only three vote, two would be needed.

Anything from frequently to never. It depends on the group.

Your rules supersede those in RONR.