Richard Brown

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.

I'm not looking at the book, either (or at the online CD-ROM version), but my understanding is the same as Gary's as to both of the points he makes. Edited to add: I have access to the CD-ROM version now. Both questions are directly addressed by the following two paragraphs on page 474 regarding Reading and Approval of Minutes: If the assembly does not wish to carry out the reading and approval of the minutes at the regular time, it may, by majority vote without debate, "dispense with the reading of the minutes." The minutes can then be taken up by majority vote without debate at any later time during the meeting while no business is pending. If the minutes are not thus taken up before adjournment, they are read and approved at the following meeting, before the later minutes are taken up. A motion to "dispense with the reading of the minutes" is not a request to omit their reading altogether. A draft of the minutes of the preceding meeting can be sent to all members in advance, usually with the notice. In such a case, it is presumed that the members have used this opportunity to review them, and they are not read unless this is requested by any member. Correction of them and approval, however, is handled in the usual way. It must be understood in such a case that the formal copy placed in the minute book contains all corrections that were made and that none of the many copies circulated to members and marked by them is authoritative (see also p. 355) (Emphasis in both paragraphs added by RB)

Guest Guest... we would normally ask you to post your question as a new topic (and someone might still do that), but since it is so close to the original topic I'll answer here. In the future, though, even if your question seems to fit with an existing topic, we prefer that people post new questions as a new topic. Nothing in RONR requires you to announce what you did in an executive session. However, depending on the circumstances, it might be advisable or even necessary as a practical matter to do so. If you plan to disclose any of what transpired in executive session, the details of that disclosure should be decided while still in executive session. If this entity is considered a public body, it may well be subject to controlling state laws, such as an open meetings law, which dictate how executive sessions must be handled. Edited to add: Please see the following pinned post regarding posting a new question: https://robertsrules.forumflash.com/topic/25416-important-read-this-first-faq-and-information-for-new-members-and-guests/

If you are the regular presiding officer, you continue to preside.... even over your own election. Edited to add: From pages 451-452: "The chair, [page 452] however, should not hesitate to put the question on a motion to elect officers or appoint delegates or a committee even if he is included."

Agreeing with Mr. Harrison, such a rule must be in your own bylaws.

Unless you have a strange provision in your bylaws or controlling state law that we don't know about, a motion carries with a majority vote as long as a quorum is present. If you have 50 members and a quorum is 26 and the bare minimum for a quorum is present (26), a vote of 1 to 0 is a majority vote and the motion would be adopted. The 25 abstentions don't count and don't affect the outcome. An abstention, by definition, is not a vote.

Yes. RONR provides that when the secretary is absent, a secretary Pro Tem should be selected, but failure to do that is not critical. The minutes may be prepared and approved based upon whatever information is available.

Guest Eileen, the action may or may not have been proper under RONR . We need more information as to the details of the vote to make this purchase. Specifically, we need to know weather this vote took place at a meeting of the board and if so, whether it was a regular meeting or a special meeting. The details concerning this meeting are critical. For example, if this action took place at a special meeting and you were not given proper notice of that meeting or if this action was not listed as one of the reasons for the special meeting,, then, per RONR, any action taken at that meeting is null and void. If the action took place at a regular meeting, we need to know how your regular meetings are scheduled and weather notice of each regular meeting must be given. If, for example, your bylaws or governing documents specify a regular meeting date and time, such as the second Monday of each month at 7 p.m., then notice of each meeting may not be required. This will depend upon exactly what your bylaws and other controlling documents and state law provide. If notice of your regular meetings is not required and this action took place at such a regular meeting at which you were absent or happened to have been out of the room, it may well have been proper. Even if notice of regular meetings is required, RONR does not require that notice of each agenda item be included in the notice. Only notice of the meeting itself need be sent. Finally, the fact that this board is quite likely a public body and subject to State open meetings law and other laws further complicates things. Those laws generally include specific notice requirements that trump RONR. Until we have that type of information, we simply cannot tell you whether what happened was proper under the rules in RONR.

Oh, my gosh.... I'm so sorry to hear that. Thank you! I became "online" friends with Gary on the "old" RONR forum around 2000 or so and met him in person when we shared a room at the NAP Biennial convention in San Antonio in 2003. It was my first NAP convention... and his, too, I think. We have talked by phone many times. I'm truly sorry to hear that he has passed away.

Do your bylaws say anything at all about board meetings other than being possible at the annual meeting? That is really the only mention of board meetings?

The expenditure might have been improper (we don't do "legal" here), but not necessarily so. For example, if a budget to spend up to a certain amount on that type of purchase has been approved, and the expenditure was within those limits, a vote may not have been necessary. It depends on your governing documents and other rules and any applicable adopted motions. It is quite common for certain officers and committee chairs to have blanket authority to spend funds without specific approval as long as those expenditures are authorized in the budget or by an appropriate rule. The purchase of routine office supplies and postage stamps comes to mind. Does your board vote on EVERY expenditure? However, if all such expenditures must be voted on and approved by the board, and the expenditure was made either without a vote or without you having been given proper notice of the meeting at which the vote took place, the expenditure was out of order and would be null and void per RONR. As already mentioned, since this is likely a "public body", there are probably state and maybe local laws that may be applicable.

A motion cannot be postponed beyond the next regular meeting, so the answer to your question is generally yes, the motion must be heard at the next meeting (assuming that meeting is within a quarterly time interval). If it is desired to postpone the motion again at the next meeting, you may do so, over and over, meeting after meeting, but you cannot postpone it beyond the next meeting at any of those meetings. An alternative, if you think it needs to be postponed beyond the next meeting, is to refer the matter to a committee. Then the committee to which the matter has been referred can make its report when it has finished studying the issue, with certain restrictions that I won't go into now. That might be at the next meeting, the meeting after that, the meeting after that, etc.

Agreeing with my colleagues, the question is whether these "junior firefighters" are actually members. If they are members, and there is no restriction in the bylaws on their right to vote, then per RONR they are members and have the right to vote as the right to vote is a fundamental right of membership. Any restriction on that right would have to be in your bylaws. Just calling them "Junior Members (or Junior Firefghters)" does not, in and of itself... at least in my opinion... restrict any of their rights. A member is a member is a member, just as a rose is a rose is a rose, regardless of what color it might be called. I'm not a botanist, but I think a yellow rose is just as much a rose as a pink rose. And so it is with regular members (or whatever they are called) and Junior Members. Junior Members are still members with the right to vote unless the bylaws prohibit voting for Junior Members/Junior Firefighters. Ultimately this is probably a matter of bylaws interpretation. Interpreting your bylaws is something only your organization can do. We cannot do that for you. We can only tell you that per RONR a member is a member is a member... and they all have the same rights unless the bylaws restrict the rights for some of them.