Richard Brown

Thanks, George. I knew it was in there somewhere.

Absolutely.

Am I imagining things or isn’t there a provision somewhere in RONR to the effect that details of committee deliberations should not be disclosed to the membership? I’m thinking the provision is in the book somewhere, but I am not able to find it at the moment.

I agree with the opinion of Dr. Kapur, and would add that it seems to me this is as much a legal question as it is a parliamentary one. I think you need legal advice on this issue.

I agree. I also agree that it is ultimately up to the members of this corporation to interpret its bylaws... and to a court, if the matter should wind up in one.

I'm late to this discussion, but agree with the last post by Mr. Martin. I think it sums things up very well.

Well, I'm constantly reminded that "Google is your friend", so I guess it's time for me to pay my friend Google a visit. I have never heard that term before. Edited to add: Google was no help and dictionary.com found no entry for the word. So, is it really a word that needs to be included in RONR?

Agreeing completely with Mr. Mervosh, besides adopting a motion at each annual meeting authorizing the Board or a committee to approve the minutes, the bylaws can be amended to provide that the Board (or some specified committee) has the authority to approve the minutes of the annual meeting. That eliminates the need to remember to adopt such a motion at each annual meeting. It is something that gets overlooked all too often.

Agreeing with Dr. Stackpole, I'm not aware of such a prohibition in RONR or anywhere else. If there is such a prohibition, it is likely in your own rules. Now, whether it is a good idea to post them on social media is an entirely separate issue.

Agreeing with the previous responses, I'll add only that if your bylaws authorize email voting, the organization can set whatever vote threshold it wants for adopting motions via an email vote. It is not that unusual for email votes to require a higher vote threshold than in person votes. That makes sense because there is often no opportunity (or limited opportunity) for debate with email votes.

That's the way I see it. And keep in mind that the board CAN waive (or suspend) the rule.

I concur with Atul Kapur’s suggestion as to “waiving” the requirement of three readings if the motion being proposed is one which the members believe should not have to be started all over again after the new board members are selected. Now that we know the rule is contained in the bylaws, I agree that it appears to be a properly adopted special rule of order, but it does provide for its own suspension.

In a parliamentary sense, yes. Not if the provision is in the bylaws. Yes. The bylaws are superior to the fundamental principles of parliamentary law.

Guest Analiza, the presence or absence of minutes of a previous meeting has no bearing on what you can do at subsequent meeting. The presence or absence of minutes has no bearing on the validity of actions you took at a previous meeting. It is a rather common misconception that actions taken are not valid or binding until approved in the minutes. That is not the case. Adopted motions become valid and binding when adopted, regardless of whether or when they get included in the minutes or when the minutes get approved.

Agreeing with Chris Harrison’s answer, we really need more information

Not unless you have some kind of customized rule that requires it. Do you? RONR certainly does not, but a regular old fashioned second by one member is required.

It is? Do you have a citation? It seems to me like adopting an agenda is rather like approving a contract. The fact that a motion was made and adopted to approve the contract is entered in the minutes, but the contract itself is not included in the minutes unless the assembly directs that it be included. The contract itself, or a copy of it, should be retained by the secretary in his records, but not necessarily in the minutes.

Guest Erica, see FAQ # 18 on the main website for the authoritative answer on withdrawing a resignation: http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#18 You might also look at FAQ # 20 about removing officers from office. It just might be what you need! Just scroll down a couple of questions from #18.

Whether the president can call an “emergency “ or special meeting to accept resignations or to fill vacancies depends on whether your bylaws authorize special meetings. They may not be held unless authorized in the bylaws. As to filling vacancies, follow the procedure spelled out in your bylaws. Unless your rules are silent or have a contrary provision, RONR specifies that vacancies shall be filled by the body which elected the officers in the first place and that notice of filling the vacancy must be given. See page 291 in RONR.

Addressing only the issue of the treasurer’s purported resignation, unless your rules provide to the contrary, a resignation is not binding until it has been accepted by the proper body, generally either the membership or the Board of Directors if the board is authorized to do so. Further, until the resignation has been acted upon, it may be withdrawn at any time. Still further, unless the resignation takes place during a meeting, a resignation should be submitted in writing. Edited to add: See pages 291 and 467-468 in RONR for more information.

I agree. That sounds like a plan. The person the board wants to fill the board vacancy may or may not be the person the board wants to elect as Vice President, but I agree with filling the board vacancy first.

This will depend more on what your bylaws say then on RONR. However, it appears to me that you have a board vacancy and also a vacancy in the office of vice president. What do your bylaws say about filling vacancies on the Board of Directors?

I do suppose, however, if it is at all practical to do so, it would be best to first call the meeting to order at the assigned location and then move the meeting to an upstairs floor or some other dry location. If this is a congenial group, though, and nothing especially controversial is to take place at the meeting, I would not worry about it.

Well, mine doesn’t. 😋

Agreeing with Mr. Katz, EXACTLY What do your bylaws say about your quorum requirement generally and EXACTLY what do they say, if it is different, about the quorum requirement for elections? Please quote verbatim, don’t paraphrase.