Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Daniel H. Honemann

Moderators
  • Content Count

    7,270
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Daniel H. Honemann

  • Rank
    Fisherman

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Timonium, Maryland

Recent Profile Visitors

6,272 profile views
  1. These appointments do not need to be ratified unless the bylaws say that they must.
  2. My guess is that, in those sections in the bylaws where it makes a difference whether a director was "elected" or "appointed", "appointed" refers to directors who are appointed by the board, but my guess doesn't count for much.
  3. As far as RONR is concerned, there is no such thing as a motion "to move the bill for discussion", but in any event one would assume that it (the motion, that is, not the bill) would be voted on after all debate on it has ended.
  4. In view of the fact that the business to which you refer was a motion to change the method of amending the constitution, it would appear that this was itself a motion to amend the constitution, assuming that the constitution sets forth, as it should, the procedure which must be followed in order to amend it. Was the prescribed procedure for amendment of the constitution followed?
  5. I don't see any need to remove any committee chair's either, but Jay asks how to go about doing it if the need (or desire) to do so should arise.
  6. Most in the 2FP prefer boilermakers during our meetings. I'm a Beefeater man myself.
  7. Rules relating to the duties of officers in connection with the orderly transaction of business during meetings are rules of order (RONR, 11th ed., p. 15, ll. 7-11). Such rules, if contained within the bylaws, may be suspended unless the bylaws prohibit their suspension (p. 263, ll. 1-7). And by the way, rules in the bylaws which are in the nature of rules of order are bylaws, not special rules of order.
  8. Won't happen (at least for another decade or so).
  9. It seems to me that the method of appointment described by Jay most closely resembles the method described in (c) on pages 494-95, as discussed in Mr. Martin's response.
  10. The way you describe this, officers are not elected by the executive committee, they are appointed by the state chair, who then declares them elected without the committee having anything to say about it. My guess is that your rules do not authorize anything of the sort.
  11. I can understand (and agree with) what is said in this sentence, except that the last six words mystify me. đŸ™‚
  12. I'm not at all certain about this. In any event, I suppose these questions will need to be resolved by use of the point of order and appeal process described in Sections 23 and 24 of RONR, unless your Committee has some other rules indicating otherwise.
  13. The first thing I should do is refer you to FAQ #10. Nothing else that I say on this subject has any real significance. Having said that, I must say that I find the facts as stated a bit confusing. I assume that when you refer to "we" (your organization) you are referring to your state's Republican State Central Committee, and that this Committee is a "regional level" entity, as referred to in your initial post, so that proxy voting is allowed at its meetings, although there seems to be some doubt as to whether or not proxies can be used in an election to fill a vacancy in the office of Chairman. You tell us that: "The question that is lately come to light is the issue of people who want to send their proxy specifying who to vote for as chair. This would be something akin to a write in vote which is not allowed by our rules. With that information can you help me with this question? Can members send their proxies with someone who was able to attend the meeting but specify who that proxy vote is to be for? It is likely we will have two possibly three people running for chair." If a valid proxy directs that it is to be used to vote for the election of someone who is nominated, I don't see why this would be akin to a write-in vote. 
  14. The magical number is not more than about a dozen, but this (for all relevant purposes) relates to the size of your Council. It has nothing to do with the size of your total membership.
  15. The calendar listing appears to have been proper notice for the Candidates’ Forum and the Lunch, but it does not appear that either of these is intended to constitute a regular or special meeting of the membership convened for the purpose of transacting business.
×
×
  • Create New...