Tom Coronite

On 1/23/2022 at 11:49 PM, Tomm said:

Motions made in Board meetings, excluding Executive and Special Sessions, shall be read and passed a minimum of three two times before finalized and acted upon unless readings are waived by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of the Board (6).

Do you mean to strikeout "waived" there? 

The resulting "...unless readings are by a two-thirds..." seems to be missing something.

Ah! I see. Thank you, Mr Martin, for clearing up my misunderstanding of what you were saying. I appreciate it.

While I certainly understand the explanation of why the "re-vote" was improper, if that's what they did, why would it not be recorded? Shouldn't the minutes reflect what was done, even if it was improper? And then let a point of order be raised, and record that?

I am in complete agreement that the original vote should've stood. I'm just having a hard time ignoring the improper action they apparently did, in fact, do.

After reading Mr. Martin’s most excellent and thorough reply, I’m thinking my original reply came off as rather snarky. That was not my intent at all. I do apologize.

It might strike some as odd that an assembly would concern itself with the ins and outs of temporarily relinquishing the chair, while not being concerned with the principle that the required impartiality of the chair would suggest he not be seconding motions.

Still not entirely clear, because you’re not giving any info specifically about who is on this board. They’re elected for 3 yr terms. OK. But are those officers on this board? If they’re not members of the board (elected, appointed, ex officio, or somehow), and we’ve not yet been given any evidence that they are, they don’t vote at board meetings.

On 1/12/2022 at 10:23 AM, Guest Calvin Branche said:

Can a group adopt a standard agenda format su that you don’t have to vote at each meeting on adopting the Agenda.  The Chair can just start the meeting after Quorum is satisfied 

Your group can do almost anything if it wants to. You could even specify in your bylaws that the chair has authority to set an agenda. I’m fully confident no regular participants in this forum would recommend doing that, but since you asked, yes you could.

Indeed, the better course of action, and more in line with what RONR suggests, is what Mr Brown and Mr Kapur have explained. 

On 1/12/2022 at 9:17 AM, Tom Coronite said:

From what you posted, it’s not clear if they are.

On 1/12/2022 at 10:20 AM, Richard Brown said:

From what he has posted, it’s not clear that any of the officers are actually members of the board.

I’d say we are in agreement! 😁

On 1/12/2022 at 8:10 AM, Guest John Heydt said:

and board of directors, consisting of (30) Members.

How are those 30 members chosen? Do your bylaws address that? That will likely answer whether or not those officers you mention are members of the board. From what you posted, it’s not clear if they are.

Perhaps raising the issue as a motion under “New Business” would work, especially if no action has been taken to date. If you use an agenda, it’s not “set” until approved by the assembly.

What are you saying? That a motion was made that (accidentally, perhaps) complied with the requirements for a bylaw amendment, but just wasn’t identified specifically as a bylaw amendment? Is that what not using “standard approach” means?

On 12/30/2021 at 8:48 PM, Guest Curious said:

Is there something in RONR that I can reference?

In addition to the sections Mr. Kapur provided, see 50:24 which references committees keeping brief memoranda in the nature of minutes, for committee use.

On 12/28/2021 at 2:52 PM, Guest Raymond Bower said:

What about a 7-member board 1 board member not present and the vote on the motion is 3 2, can a board member or a member ask the chair to vote?

What about a 7-member board and the vote is 3-3 does the chair have to vote, or by not voting he is assumed to have abstained. If so, can a board member or a member ask the chair to vote?

Anyone can ask anyone else anything, but nobody can be compelled to vote. Your examples are of a small board, so under those rules, the chair can vote. The chair could also choose not to vote, if he’s so inclined.

When did this policy actually take effect? According to RONR, a motion takes effect upon its adoption, absent a rule or provision to the contrary.

It’s not entirely clear from what you describe, but if a motion to adopt this policy wasn’t made until Jan 1, you may have your answer.

On 12/22/2021 at 8:32 PM, Guest Dazed and Confused said:

She is quite versed in Robert Rules

She tell you that herself?

9:27 speaks to the reading and approval of minutes of executive sessions. Hard to read/approve what doesn’t exist. 😉

Membership generally confers certain rights, including being able to attend meetings, make motions, debate, and vote. If you’re a member of the group meeting, you generally have the right to vote, unless your rules (I don’t get what a GSR is/does) say otherwise.

But what you’ve quoted in the original post mentions bylaws only, not standing rules.

On 12/8/2021 at 8:59 AM, Brother Seamus said:

Can a church council member that is drawing a salary as “choir director”-also be the Secretary AND the treasurer?

this seems like a huge conflict of interest to me

As Mr Mervosh has said, it violates no rule in RONR. To add on, if the secretary/treasurer is an ex-officio member of the council (which I suspect to be the case), there may be times when s/he is in a position to vote on compensation for the choir director. In such a case, while the council member cannot be compelled not to vote, RONR states that member should not vote, if s/he has a monetary interest in the matter that is not common to the other council members.

Generally speaking, the parliamentarian would not be addressing the assembly. The chair would be the one speaking.

I would think that’s up to your membership to determine, as it’s your rule, and not one found in RONR.

If it’s a meeting of the membership, the board members are not there as the board, but rather they are there as members, unless your own rules provide otherwise. 

On 12/1/2021 at 8:38 AM, Guest Nicci Ruijs said:

They say this is according to roberts rules where can i find this rule.

You won’t. Is such a rule in your bylaws?

You don’t specifically say if this is a meeting of the membership, or a meeting of the board. Which it is likely makes a difference as to whether you can make a motion, as it appears you’re not a board member. I apologize if I inferred that incorrectly.

What you want to bring up sounds more like a question than a motion.

Fair enough. I suppose, then, I’m left to wonder why “should not vote” is even in there. I didn't see anything in the OP that the member was being prevented from voting.

On 11/30/2021 at 10:21 AM, Richard Brown said:

The question is whether the membership had the right to prevent the member from voting. 

It’s more was the OP correct in what she describes as a “push” to let the member vote. I’m not sure pushing for something RONR says should not happen is best.

Pointing out that a member should refrain from voting, versus pointing out that a member cannot be compelled to refrain from voting, perhaps is a matter of emphasis. But while I see the accuracy of both opinions expressed above, it does seem one’s emphasis is more closely aligned with the wording in RONR, to me anyway. Definitely worth no more than 2 cents, and likely even less. 🙂