Edgar Guest

Only members (of the body that is meeting) have any parliamentary rights. Non-members have none. They don't even have a right to be there. Non-members can, however, be permitted (by the assembly) to attend and speak. And the assembly can admit some non-members and exclude others. And it can permit some non-members to speak but not others.

That's right. If your bylaws say, for example, that you have a treasurer then you must have a treasurer (i.e. you have to obey your bylaws). You might not be able to "complete" the election on the first round of voting but you have to do your best to complete the election. No matter how long it takes.

No. If no one is willing to serve then you might want to either eliminate the office (by amending the bylaws) or dissolve the organization (by rescinding the bylaws). Or you might want to try and figure out why no one wants this particular office.

No. By nominating and/or voting for someone else. By voting for someone else. No. But if your bylaws don't require a ballot vote, and if there is only one nominee, then the chair can declare the sole nominee elected "by acclamation".

Perhaps it depends on the specific nature of the unfinished business? For instance, questions laid on the table die if not taken from the table before a quarterly time interval has elapsed (p.301). Or something like that. I suppose there might be other instances of unfinished business (consideration of a continuing breach?) that (like old parliamentarians?) never die. But this is the sort of parliamentary arcana I prefer to leave to the experts (i.e. those with upper-case letters after their names).

Really?

And your basis for this understanding is . . . ?

You seem to have answered your own question.

I suppose you could amend the rules to, for example, increase the number of fire calls required for life membership and this person might no longer qualify. But that sounds like a pretty cheesy thing to do.

Well, if their status depends on being alive, there are laws that protect that status.

And, just to provide a specific example, let's say that the motion was to paint the clubhouse. The vote results in a tie. The motion is defeated. You could say that the board didn't decide to paint the clubhouse or you could say that the board decided not to paint the clubhouse. The result is the same.

See also this recent topic.

I suppose so. But if the motion is adopted you may have to kill him.

See the first full paragraph on p.487. And note that "someone" can't order the reading of the board's minutes; it takes a lot of "someones". The idea here is that the board is an instrument (instrumentality?) of the general membership and that the tail shouldn't wag the dog.

As Mr. Fish suggests, discussions don't belong in the minutes. Either before or after the fact.

Minutes don't need to be "reported" to anyone. But note that the general membership can order the reading of the board's minutes at a meeting of the general membership. If the board meeting in question was held in executive session then the general membership meeting should be held in executive session as well (or at least that portion of the meeting where the minutes are read).

Well, you didn't read it here. Or in RONR. And this thread is four years old! Look in the Index under "executive session". And congratulations on becoming a member (though I suspect you may miss putting the bunny back together).

Are you asking what to do if there's no agenda at all or are you asking what to do if there's an agenda but it hasn't been given to the members before the meeting? If the former, see Mr. Lages' reply (#6). If the latter, see FAQ #14.