Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

225 profile views
  1. Thank you for your answers. I thought that was the case,; however I did not know where to find it in RONR.
  2. Report post Posted just now Is this a regular meeting or a special meeting? Do your bylaws require 30 days notice for both regular meetings and special meetings? Also, are your regular meetings on a regular schedule, such as the second Tuesday of each month at the same time and place? Is this provided for in your bylaws? Generally, if the notice requirement for a meeting is not complied with, any business conducted at the meeting would be invalid. However, let's first make sure that your bylaws actually require individual notice of each meeting It will help if you can actually quote the bylaw provision regarding notice. Please quote it exactly, don't paraphrase It is a semi-annual meeting, required in the spring and another in the fall. See below for the bylaw provision. J. "The official call of the Semi-annual Conclaves shall be distributed to all member clubs’ presidents and delegates at least thirty (30) days prior to the conclave." "Conclave" is the organization's name for these meetings.
  3. The bylaws require a meeting notice of thirty (30) days. The notice is not sent out 18 days before the meeting. Is the meeting a valid meeting? Where in RONR can I find the answer
  4. One last post on the question: Page 499, Question # 248 of Parliamentary Law pretty well cleared up the issue when the answer to the question, in part, reads: "A resolution or order is just as much in force whether recorded or not."
  5. Alexis,thank you and Henry M. Robert for your answers. Page 499, Question # 248 of Parliamentary Law pretty well cleared up the issue when the answer to the question, in part, reads: "A resolution or order is just as much in force whether recorded or not." As parliamentarian for an organization that leaves out of minutes that should be in the minutes such as main motions, Parliamentary Law really cleared up the question for me. I just couldn't believe that the motion would be mute because the secretary didn't record it.
  6. Tthe secretary wrote the minutes of the previous meeting the night before the meeting at which the minutes were to be approved and that meeting occurs more than three months later (shouldn't have, but things happen) and the secretary realized her error, showed the motion to the affected parties immediately following the meeting was adjourned. Too late to call the meeting back to order. It seems to me that the fact that the motion was adopted and was in effect that it would take a motion to rescind something previously adopted, even though the minutes were approved and even the member who made the motion didn't realize that it was made at the immediately previous meeting but did in fact quote the motion he made during the present meeting. It seems to me that I better have a recording of all the meetings I attend, which are many. As I understand Mr. Honemann, if the president or even a board doesn't like an adopted motion they could tell the secretary not to record the motion (many secretaries would oblige) and it would have the effect of rescinding the motion without a motion to rescind something previously adopted unless of course someone remembers and corrects the minutes later with a motion to amend something previously adopted. A special meeting to correct minutes is impracticable because the members are scattered state wide and the issue will be mute by the next scheduled meeting. The member now realizing that the motion was made at the previous meeting will make the motion to amend something previously adopted to correct those minutes.
  7. I read the tread Richard referred to paying particular attention to the post by Dan Honemann. The motion made was not a new policy; however was made and adopted to clarify policy that was already in place. The individual(s) that do not desire to follow the policy talked to the secretary who showed the motion form where it had been adopted. The individual(s) who want to interpret the bylaws as they desire rather than the intent at the time the bylaws were adopted.
  8. A main motion was made and adopted by the BOD; however was not recorded in the minutes as the secretary waited until the last minute to write the minutes. Meetings are one every quarter; however no one caught the correction made the correction to record the motion. Now the committee chair that the motion affects states that since he wasn't at the meeting at which the motion was made and the motion was not recorded in the "official record" (the minutes) then he doesn't have to follow it until it becomes part of the official recorded. His statement : "I’m sure you can appreciate the need to have this motion included in the minutes and when, and if, the minutes are corrected to include it, it will be binding." Another correction to the minutes cannot be made until the next BOD meeting when the issue would be mute. Is the motion valid even though the motion has not been recorded in the minutes?
  9. "If the individual is elected, his or her resignation does not have to be accepted." (Mr Martin) "The power to appoint or elect persons to any office or board carries with it the power to accept their resignations, and also the power to fill any vacancy occurring in it, unless the bylaws expressly provide otherwise.p. 467 I disagree that the bylaws giving the president the power to fill a vacancy also give him the power to accept an elected officer's resignation. The assembly,as I understand the question, has the power to elect to the office and therefore has the power to accept the elected officer's resignation. The bylaws give the president the power to fill a vacancy in office, not to accept the resignation unless the bylaws specifically state the president has the power to accept an officer's resignation. I interpret the vacancy provision in RONR to mean that if the bylaws state that "the president, vice-president, secretary and treasurer shall be elected at the annual meeting and then state that two delegates shall be appointed by the president. to serve ... "; then in the vacancy provision provide for the president to fill vacancies in office, then the only resignations the president could accept would be the two delegates the president has the power to appoint and an elected officer submits a resignation, then the membership who elected the officer must accept his or her resignation before the president can fill the office as no vacancy exists until the resignation is accepted by the membership that elected the officer accept the resignation.
  10. "Campaign for, and elect, someone else. It shouldn't be too hard to convince your fellow members to vote for someone other than a person who has indicated he will resign once he's elected." (post 2)) If the individual is elected, his or her resignation does not have to be accepted.
  11. We have a number of non-voting members who pay more dues for the privilege of not being required to work but can neither vote nor hold office nor sit on a standing committee. The key word is "member". The rules giving them the right of membership without the right to vote, hold office or to be a member of a standing committee does not prevent them from attending meetings, to make motions or to speak in debate. As members they have the right to receive notice of bylaw amendments and for that matter any notices required to be sent to members in accordance with the rules of the organization. RONR, page 3 defines members. If the bylaws provide for the exclusions of some rights of these non-voting members they are saying that the non-voting members have all the other rights of membership. RONR, page 89 requires notices to be sent to each member unless a different standard is specified by rule. See RONR. page 596 for giving notice of amendments to bylaws.
  • Create New...