Richard Brown

Guest Michelle, you might also take a look at Frequently Asked Question # 14 on the main website: http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#14

I agree. That was my thought from the beginning. So, unless the bylaws define a quorum differently, it would be a majority of the actual living, breathing members currently on the board.

Agreeing with my colleagues, the letter itself normally should not be entered in the minutes, but probably should be kept on file by the secretary for some period of time along with other important correspondence. That is a policy matter for your organization to determine.

You might take a look at this article by Dr. John Stackpole (jstackpo) that he linked to in this thread: https://robertsrules.forumflash.com/topic/32993-point-of-discussion-not-on-agenda/?tab=comments#comment-192603 It's about the 13th comment in that thread.

Almost all rulings of the chair may be overruled by a majority vote on an appeal from the ruling of the chair. The only exception is when the appeal is clearly frivolous or dilatory and there can be no other reasonable interpretation.

Agreeing with both previous responses, an "agenda" which has not been adopted by the assembly is merely a guide for the chairman (and perhaps the assembly) to use as a reminder of the items of business he thinks should be taken up and the order in which he would like to do so. It is not binding until actually adopted by the assembly. If it has not been adopted by the assembly, any member may make an original main motion introducing new business at any time that no other business is pending regardless of the fact that the chair may have prepared and distributed a list of items he wants to cover and which he calls an agenda. Whether it is wise to do so is a different issue. If the society has a long-standing custom of following the chair's agenda, routinely attempting to subvert it may not make you more popular.

I imagine that either state law, your city Charter, a city ordinance, or your own Council rules specify who presides at Council meetings. Unless your own rules provide otherwise, it should make no difference whether this is a regular meeting or a special meeting.

Unless your bylaws provide for it, you do not have a "runoff" election with only the top vote getters. What you do, unless your own bylaws or special rules of order provide otherwise, is vote again with all candidates still on the ballot. If nobody wins on the second ballot, you keep repeating the balloting until someone finally wins. As an alternative, you can adopt a motion to remove one or more candidates from the next ballot, but any candidates so removed from the ballot still remain eligible to.receive write in votes and to be elected by write in votes. It is up to your organization to interpret your own rules and to determine whether absentee ballots should be counted in any repeat balloting or runoff, but in my opinion they should not be counted unless your rules specifically provide for it. That's the problem with mixing absentee ballots with in person ballots.

Thank you John, I appreciate you posting this.

Agreeing with Chris Harrison, that approval is usually granted by unanimous consent. The chair would say something like, "I must step away for a few minutes. if there is no objection, I am appointing Jack Smith to serve as chair Pro Tem until either the vice chairman or I return".

I agree. Dan Honemann summed it up very succinctly. If the sergeant-at-arms is a member of the voting body, he has the right to vote for anyone he wants to, including the right to vote for himself.

Another method of determining who will serve the two-year term is by lot, such as by drawing straws, a roll of a die, etc.

Abstentions have no effect on whether a quorum is present. A quorum is based on the number of members who are present. A majority vote, two-thirds vote, or any similar threshold is based on the number of members present and voting. If an organization or a committee has 50 members with 26 as a quorum, and a quorum is present, a motion will carry with a vote of 1 to 0 with 25 abstentions . Note: check your bylaws and your own special Rules of Order to make sure they do not provide for a different threshold

I disagree with the part of your comment that I have bolded. Questions about a report are in order after a report is presented regardless of whether the report includes (or leads to) an actual motion. Those questions would usually be in the form of a "Request for Information".

Why does everyone think new member Chuck has a copy of RONR? Do you two know something about him that the rest of us don't know?

Agreeing with Greg Goodwiller, you might find FAQ # 1 informative: http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#1 It is the chair's sole decision whether to vote when her vote will affect the result. I note that this is a seven member board, so under the "small board rules" in RONR, the chair would normally vote along with everyone else.

Good catch. I assumed Guest Nick was referring to a roll call of members present at the beginning of the meeting.

Nothing in RONR prohibits it. In other words, yes, such a member can vote on everything that is considered after he arrives unless you have a superior rule to the contrary. The right to vote is a basic right of membership and there is no need to be present at any time other than at the moment when the vote is taken.

I agree with mr. Honemann. If the bylaws refer to this position as executive secretary, I think a bylaw amendment is required in order to change the title to Administrative Assistant. Addressing the comment by dinner guest, it has been my experience that with most small and medium-sized nonprofit organizations, the executive secretary is the highest-ranking and often the only paid employee. Regardless of whether that person is considered a high level or low-level employee, if the position is defined in the bylaws, that is the way it should be referred to in other documents unless it is changed in the by-laws.

Agreeing with Mr. Katz, you might find the following language on page 433 of RONR authoritative: "Members of the nominating committee are not barred from becoming nominees for office themselves. To make such a requirement would mean, first, that service on the nominating committee carried a penalty by depriving its members of one of their privileges; and second, that appointment or election to the nominating committee could be used to prevent a member from becoming a nominee."

Yes, in most states public bodies are subject to open meetings laws (sunshine laws) which often dictate posting the agenda in advance and what procedures, if any, must be followed to change the agenda once posted. Also, some organizations such as homeowner associations are sometimes subject to similar laws concerning posting an agenda, etc. Our advice here is based on the rules on RONR.

I agree with Mr. Katz's post immediately above. I don't believe we know enough to say more than "per RONR, the chair has no authority to delay the implementation of an adopted motion" and that "if he does so, he might be subject do disciplinary action or censure".

Guest Sharon, you might find the answer to FAQ No. 14 helpful regarding the use of an agenda: http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#14

Agreeing with Dr. Kapur, a motion becomes effective immediately.... instantaneously.... upon adoption unless by its own terms or by virtue of some other rule there is a delay. The presiding officer (or chairman or president) has no authority to "delay" the effective date or time of a motion. If a problem is found with the motion later, it can be rescinded or amended. If there are concerns about its "appropriateness" at the time it is being considered, it can be withdrawn (with the consent of the assembly), postponed or referred to a committee. Or simply voted down.

I don't think there is a direct reference to it in RONR, but if you search this forum you will find many discussions on that point.