Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Tom Coronite

Members
  • Posts

    609
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Tom Coronite

  1. Mr. Harrington, although it would not accomplish the annulment effect you seek, take a look at Use of a Preamble (10:16). "When special circumstances make it desirable to include a brief statement of background, the motion should be cast in the form of a resolution..." Again, not an annulment, but it may be a way for you to include and articulate your displeasure at the way the matter was originally handled, and thus make it part of getting it rescinded.
  2. I believe I’m familiar with the situation (based on OP name and subject matter) and understand what you’re looking to do. Unfortunately, I don’t think you’ll find what you’re looking for in RONR. As Mr. Novosielski pointed out, rescinding the action of the Council can certainly be accomplished, per RONR, but erasing it entirely from the record is a very different matter.
  3. And in addition to what Mr. Kapur has stated, if it happens to be a ballot vote, keep in mind that the presiding officer, if he's a member, can always vote at the time other members do. (45:28)
  4. Not sure what you mean by "introduced". Had a motion been made? Seconded? Had debate begun? Basically, if they were never taken up, they can, at the next meeting, be brought up as new business. If they were pending when the meeting adjourned, they should come up under unfinished business & general orders. There is no "old business" category.
  5. Or maybe an unexpected write-in candidate will emerge and everyone can ride the dark horse home early. 😉
  6. To resolve an anticipated tie, you could try convincing someone to vote for someone else. To resolve an actual tie vote, vote again. And again if necessary. Perhaps someone will change his mind, a candidate may withdraw, or a third candidate a majority will support might emerge.
  7. Although your bylaws apparently don’t specify who can call special meetings and how, based on your statement, perhaps an argument can be made the special meetings may be authorized, and are contemplated in the bylaws, based on your statement about the 2 weeks of notice from the pulpit. Armed with that perspective, I’d consider moving, at your upcoming December meeting, that a special meeting be called for such-and-such a date, at which a bylaw amendment will be considered. If your church approves that, some might consider that authoritative, although perhaps the entirety of your bylaws would suggest otherwise. Impossible, to say, not having seen them. I unfortunately have lots of experience with bad church bylaws. Not surprised you’re in such a position.
  8. I absolutely see what Mr. Honemann is saying. But I’m wondering if their bylaws compel them to do something. A new member induction, at a certain time of year, to be precise. I suppose the devil is in the details of the bylaw wording.
  9. Wait? What? Do your bylaws say there SHALL be a member induction, and it’s to be done at a certain time of year? Or do they say IF there is to be a member induction, it SHALL be done at a certain time of year?
  10. Personally, I’d drop the strike-through text.
  11. You’ve cited it yourself, there in red. Something along the lines of “As there are no other nominations, Joe Shmoe is elected to the officer of dog catcher.” should work.
  12. It would depend on the circumstances, probably. Was this an election irregularity? A miscalculation of a voting threshold? A matter referred to a body that’s properly under the purview of another? The remedy likely depends on what happened. So, what happened?
  13. Just a hunch, but it’s probably more misusing than using.
  14. Aside from the misuse of “table,” the people crying foul over their votes being “negated” may be off base. Yes, “table” should not have been used. But if the motion on the floor had been properly postponed, that would have been done prior to their absentee votes being counted, also. In fact, whereas the original motion wasn’t voted upon, why were they counting absentee votes?
  15. Did the assembly take some action based on the recommendation? Record THAT in the minutes.
  16. Technically you haven’t asked a question, but if a motion is made, and the board vote on that motion is evenly divided, say 4 to 4, that motion fails, as it didn’t get a majority of the votes. Maybe that’s helpful? 🤞
  17. 1) Ineligibility for office is not the only way you could end up in a bind. Suppose the nominee changes his mind and is unwilling to serve and you want to nominate someone else? Or you discover he’s been embezzling funds and you want to nominate someone else? What if he dies before the election? 2) A blank piece of paper has already been suggested by Mr. Honemann. If you have your hearts set on printed ballots, you could always add a blank line or two in addition to the pre-printed names. In fact, that facilitates write-ins also. There’s a lot of wisdom and experience behind what is prescribed in RONR. Think long and hard before rejecting it.
  18. Just a few days ago there was a post in which the OP described how their rules preventing nominations from the floor ended up putting them in a bind. They had persons nominated who were ineligible, and their rules prohibited nominating anyone else before the meeting, and even AT the meeting. IMHO, especially whereas you admit you can’t recall anyone being nominated from the floor, you’re trying to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. How long does it take to say “Are there any further nominations for (position)? Hearing none…” 😕
  19. https://robertsrules.com/frequently-asked-questions/ See FAQ #6
  20. You say the “current” secretary IS no longer on the committee. If not a member, that person presumably should not be there, absent some permission given. So don’t give it. You also suggest the current secretary needs to be there to call the roll and read minutes. Someone else could do that, or you could elect a new (interim) secretary prior to those items. If at any point it’s discovered that a non-member is in attendance without permission, simply explain that fact and invite the person to leave. If you anticipate rough stuff, perhaps have some folks on hand who’ll help this person find the exit. In any case, it’s unclear to me, due to terms such as current and interim, whether or not this person is now a member, or a secretary.
  21. They may if your bylaws authorize that. 13:17 advises against Co-chairs, for the impossible problems it causes.
  22. IMO you’d be skipping a step that your bylaws require, if you do it that way. Rather, since your bylaws provide for the secretary casting a ballot if such a motion is made, unanimous consent could be used for THAT. Rather than “without objection…the nominee is elected,” I’d suggest it would be “”If there is no objection….. the secretary will cast a ballot…” (As an aside, you might want to consider amending the bylaws to eliminate that practice.)
  23. Raise a point of order at the meeting. Points of order should be recorded in the minutes regardless of whether they are sustained or lost. 48:4
  24. Ah. I glossed over that point. My bad. Looks like you may very well have some open positions, as your bylaws appear to prohibit nominations from the floor.
  25. Maybe the club would vote favorably on their applications for membership at the meeting, prior to the voting on the nominated candidates?
×
×
  • Create New...