Richard Brown

You might ask your difficult member to show you where it says officers and members DON'T have to abide by the rules and decisions of the organization . Does he think organizations adopt rules and motions just for the fun of it with no expectation that the members and officers will abide by those decisions? It is so fundamental that to claim otherwise is ludicrous.

Have you already created this organization? Have bylaws already been adopted ? Knowing where things stand now will enable us to better help you.

The original poster used the name "Selectman". That tells me that he is perhaps talking about a public body, such as a city council. It is quite common for such public bodies to require the affirmative votes of a "majority of the full membership" in order to adopt substantive legislation. It's true not just for small bodies like city councils, but also for state legislatures. Procedural motions might require only a regular majority vote, but the higher threshold might be required for substantive legislation. If that is the case here, the abstentions might have the effect of a no vote, but they still are not votes. If it is a body of seven members, and a majority of the entire membership is required to adopt legislation, the body would need four Yes votes in order to adopt legislation.... regardless of how many members are present. However, as others have pointed out, the presumption, unless we are told otherwise, is that a regular majority vote is what is needed.

I agree it isn't really a big deal, but according to page 230 and other pages, a motion to recess is a main motion if made when no other business is pending. Page 469 is clear that all main motions (with some exceptions) should be included in the minutes. If made while other business is pending, the motion to recess is a privileged motion.

Agreeing with Mr.Katz, you might find FAQ # 4 helpful as to what constitutes a majority vote: http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#4 After reading FAQ # 4, scroll down two questions to FAQ # 6 regarding abstentions. btw, I think you meant to say a motion was on the floor, not on the table. As Mr. katz pointed out, a motion which is on the table has been temporarily set aside... it has been laid on the table. Edited to add: As the answer to FAQ # 6 points out, abstentions don't count. They are ignored. They are not votes.

There is no provision in RONR for a "leave of absence". Any such provisions will have to be in your bylaws.

Well, that's only partially true. The assembly can order by majority vote or unanimous consent that documents be attached to the minutes. The assembly is ultimately in control of what goes in (and gets attached to) the minutes.

Most likely no, unless some major parliamentary rule was violated. We need more information in order to give a better answer. But, if what was voted on failed, it can be renewed (introduced again) at a future session. If it was adopted, depending on what it was, it likely can be rescinded or modified by use if the motion to rescind or amend something previously adopted. That motion is subject to special notice and vote requirements. Note: rescinding or amending a motion that approved a contract could present non-parliamentary legal issues that are outside the scope of this forum.

In case you do not have a copy of RONR, here is part of what it says about an agenda on pages 372-373: "ORGANIZATIONS AND MEETINGS IN WHICH ADOPTION OF AN AGENDA IS CUSTOMARY. It is customary to adopt an agenda or program for each session in organizations that do not hold frequent regular meetings, and at conventions and other sessions that may last for several days (see 59). This is also frequently done when, for any reason, neither the standard order of business nor a special order of business established by rule of the organization is practical or applicable. PROCEDURE FOR ADOPTION. In cases in which an agenda is adopted, usually this is done at the outset of a session and the agenda is intended to cover the entire session. At a session having no prescribed or adopted order of business, such an agenda is followed as a guide by the chair pending its formal adoption and can be adopted by majority vote, even if it contains special orders; it is then the order of business for that session. At a session that already has an order of business, an agenda can be adopted by a majority vote only if it does not create any special orders and does not conflict with the existing order of business; otherwise, a two-thirds vote is required (see also p. 264, ll. 14–28). AGENDA PROVIDED IN ADVANCE. In some organizations, it is customary to send each member, in advance of a meeting, an order of business or agenda, with some indication of the matters to be considered under each heading. Such an agenda is often provided for information only, with no intention or practice of submitting it for adoption. Unless a precirculated agenda is formally adopted at the session to which it applies, it is not binding as to detail or order of consideration, other than as it lists preexisting orders of the day (pp. 364ff.) or conforms to the standard order of business (pp. 25–26, 353ff.) or an order of business prescribed by the rules of the organization (pp. 16, 25). [page 373] CHANGING AN AGENDA. When the adoption of a proposed agenda is pending, it is subject to amendment by majority vote. After an agenda has been adopted by the assembly, no change can be made in it except by a two-thirds vote, a vote of a majority of the entire membership, or unanimous consent. (See also Taking Up Business Out of Its Proper Order, pp. 363–64; cf. p. 630, ll. 12–17.) An affirmative vote to adopt an agenda may not be reconsidered." What might not be clear from those passages is that normally a board or membership which meets at least as often as quarterly should normally not be adopting a formal agenda but should be using the standard order of business set out in RONR. However, it is common for an agenda to be prepared for the use of the chair to use as a guide in making sure he covers all necessary items of business. Such an agenda is just a guide and is not binding. Also, unless you have a rule to the contrary, during new business, any member may move any item of new business regardless of whether it was listed on the agenda. One other note: If this is a homeowners association, it may be subject to state laws regarding posting an agenda in advance of a meeting and making changes to the agenda.

See if FAQ # 14 answers your question. If not, let us know: http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#14 Unless you have a customized rule to the contrary, the president doesn't control the agenda. The assembly itself does. In this case it's the board.

And if the chair doesn't know the answer because he happens not to have a perfect memory or hasn't been a member since the organization's founding?

Even If there is such an animal as "temporarily being excused from the duties of membership", I question whether that would affect the quorum requirement. As Weldon Merritt said, a person is either a member or not a member. I think for that to happen, the bylaws would have to specifically provide for it in some fashion.

Mr. Harris, I agree with Mr. Honemann that your bylaws aren't as clear as they could (and should) be regarding the alternate director filling a vacancy. I further agree that it looks like the regional council is appoint someone to fill the vacancy until the next annual meeting. Based on your statement, which I assume is a paraphrase from the bylaws, it just isn't clear. Could you quote for us the EXACT language from your bylaws regarding vacancies in the board of directors and the "filling in" by the alternate director? This is likely a matter of bylaws interpretation, which only your organization can do, but regardless of whether the alternate director automatically fills the vacancy, it is clear to me that a new election should have been held at the annual meeting.

That is almost certainly a matter of bylaws interpretation and will probably be determined by your bylaws. There is no such thing in RONR as a "leave of absence". What , exactly, do your bylaws say about it?

Shelly, I disagree. You cannot assume that just because they hold an RONR seminar for incoming board members that they have officially adopted RONR as their parliamentary authority. Remember, the original poster told us in the original post that neither the bylaws nor rules even mention RONR.

Yes, if you want an electronic version of something, the CD-ROM version of the 11th edition of RONR is about $69 plus shipping, depending on whether you order it from the publisher or from NAP (The National Association of Parliamentarians). It is an exact duplicate (minus the line numbers) of the printed version of RONR. You can read about it here, and click on one of the imbedded links to order it: http://www.robertsrules.com/default.html

Agreeing with the answer by Mr. Huynh above, your question is rather difficult for us to answer with a short answer in this Q and A forum. This is one of those situations where you really just need to read the rules on proper decorum and how to handle breaches of it. The short answer, though, is that such personal attacks are out of order. Any member can raise a point of order and the chair, on her own initiative, may call the member to order and rule that the comments are out of order. But, again, you really should read what RONR has to say on the topic.

In all likelihood, the answers to your questions will be contained in your school board's own rules and governing statutes. If the rules in RONR control (and they are likely superseded by superior state and local rules), a quorum must be present in order for a deliberative assembly to conduct any business except for the four exceptions contained in RONR (to adjourn, fix the time to which to adjourn, recess and take action to obtain a quorum). Your state's open meeting laws (sunshine laws) will also likely have something to say about this. I think these questions would best be asked of your school board attorney.

I agree with Mr. Novosielski, but would add that, depending on provisions in the bylaws, it might be permissible for the body which approves applications for membership (provided such approval is required), can delay considering an application until after six months.

Are you referring to a public body such as a city council? If so, their rules and procedures are likely spelled out in state law, the city charter, and/or the council's own rules... all of which supersede RONR. According to the rules in RONR, if it is a meeting of a "council", ONLY the members of the council have a right to speak and make comments unless the assembly itself decides by motion or rule to let others speak.

ShellyS, your answer is so far off base that I hardly know where to begin. For openers, I think you misunderstand what the original poster said. Second, your answer is not based on RONR, as our answers should be. Third, there is no inherent conflict in the same person being the "bookkeeper" and the person who writes the checks. Those two functions are traditional functions of the treasurer in most organizations. See the sample bylaws in RONR and also the customary duties of the treasurer as stated on page 461. As to what constitutes a conflict of interest per RONR (which is what our answers are supposed to be based on), the situation as described by the original poster does not create a conflict or "conflict of interest" as defined by RONR on page 407. Without trying to give legal advice, I think I can safely say that I doubt that there is a state statute anywhere in the USA which prohibits an organization's treasurer from serving as both the "bookkeeper" and the person who writes the checks. Those are the traditional duties of the treasurer.

Shelly, what on earth are you talking about? Where do you get the idea they are having RONR seminars? Where do you get the idea they have actually adopted RONR? Where do you get the idea that the IRS code somehow controls this? What makes you think this is a government organization or that "selective enforcement" is illegal? What state statutes are you referring to that dictate how an organization must interpret and enforce its bylaws and other rules? I'm afraid your answer is pretty much BS and not based on any information provided to us by the original poster. Joshua Katz and Dr. Stackpole (jstackpo) correctly answered the original poster's questions based on the information provided and on the rules in RONR.

Guest D. Dyer, I had a very hard time following exactly what happened, but, no, it is not true that RONR prohibits bylaws from every being presented again or amended. More information will help us to give you better answers.

To follow up on the last post (immediately above) by Mr. Katz, the recording is not the minutes. It is not necessary to have a recording in order to have minutes. The minutes are a written record of what was done at the meeting. The recording is merely a device that can be used to help produce accurate minutes.

I agree with JJ and started to make a post to that effect several times, but ultimately decided to just not "go there". Thank you, JJ.