Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Josh Martin

Members
  • Content Count

    12,723
  • Joined

  • Last visited

4 Followers

About Josh Martin

  • Birthday 09/05/1986

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
  • Interests
    reading, writing, video games, parliamentary procedure

Recent Profile Visitors

3,378 profile views
  1. Josh Martin

    Motion to Suspend the Rules

    Mr. Katz, I certainly concur that, so far as RONR is concerned, the rules in question may not be suspended. We are told, however, that the organization has its own rules on this subject, which provide that any of the organization’s rules may be suspended, except for certain exceptions, and this is not one of the exceptions. It would seem to me that the organization’s rule takes precedence.
  2. No, this is completely false. Members are free to discuss what happened in executive session with members who missed part or all of the debate. The purpose of executive session is to keep the proceedings secret from non-members, not from members.
  3. Josh Martin

    When is the proper time to make a motion?

    Yes. Specifically, the member should be requested to wait until New Business. The member should not be making motions during the President’s Report unless they are germane to the report (and even then, he should wait until after the report is given). There is no such heading as “Old Business.” The name of this heading in RONR is “Unfinished Business and General Orders.” Due to the nature of this heading, all items of business under this heading will already be known in advance, so a member would never spontaneously make a motion under this heading.
  4. See FAQ #10. Accept the resignations of the board members, provide notice that the vacancies will be filled at the next regular meeting, and then fill the vacancies at the next regular meeting. The body with the power to accept the resignations and fill the vacancies is the same body which elected the positions in the first place, unless your bylaws provide otherwise. Additionally, the board may accept resignations and fill vacancies if the bylaws grant the board full power and authority to act for the association between meetings of the association. Alternately, if it is time for the regularly scheduled elections, simply proceed with those elections. Finally, if there is no longer a President or Vice President as a result of the resignations, a Chairman Pro Tempore should be elected. If there is no longer a Secretary, a Secretary Pro Tempore should be elected. These persons would serve for the duration of the meeting or until permanent officers are elected and take office, whichever happens first.
  5. I think there is some question as to whether such a procedure is proper, unless it is in the bylaws, since it has the effect of denying any members who arrive late the right to attend, and all other rights contingent upon attendance, such as to speak in debate or to vote. I think Mr. Dinner’s point is that the interruption (multiple members speaking without recognition, with sufficient volume to disrupt the assembly) was not proper, and it was not necessary for the speaker to wait for them to quiet down. The chair, or any member, can and should have called the disruptive members to order, in my opinion, although I suppose a question of privilege would also be appropriate. Certainly, if this had been done, the time used for these motions should not have counted against the speaker’s time. I concur, however, that since this was not done, extending the speaker’s time for an amount of time equal to the interruption would have been the proper course of action. I agree that the chair should have simply done so on his own initiative and, failing that, a member could have moved to extend the time or raised a Point of Order.
  6. Josh Martin

    Conflict with bylaws and Roberts Rules of Order

    It does not appear, however, that there is yet any indication that “the organization prefers to conduct its business in a disorderly fashion.” Instead, the organization has chosen to (in an orderly fashion) adopt an amendment to the bylaws which provides that certain members are ineligible for office and, in certain circumstances, do not have the right to vote. This provides an exception to the general rule in the bylaws which permits all members to vote and serve in office. It also supersedes the rules in RONR, which permits all members to vote in all cases, and permits the society to elect anyone to office. There are reasonable grounds for disagreement on whether these rules are in the society’s interest, but I do not see anything disorderly or unethical about the rules themselves or the process of adopting them. ”Within this framework under the general parliamentary law, an assembly or society is free to adopt any rules it may wish (even rules deviating from parliamentary law) provided that, in the procedure of adopting them, it conforms to parliamentary law or its own existing rules. The only limitations upon the rules that such a body can thus adopt might arise from the rules of a parent body (as those of a national society restricting its state or local branches), or from national, state, or local law affecting the particular type of organization.” (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 10)
  7. Josh Martin

    Open Forum

    Yes, but let’s make sure we are clear what is meant by “action” in this context. Specifically, I am referring to action in a parliamentary sense. If a main motion is made, that is recorded in the minutes. If members just talk about something without any motion being made (which generally should not be done), there is nothing to record. I could perhaps provide more guidance if you could clarify what exactly you mean when you say “often times items of business are recorded even if no ‘action’ has taken place.” RONR also requires minutes, so these facts, in and of themselves, do not change anything. It may well be, however, that some other provision of the corporate code you refer to requires more detailed information in the minutes than RONR. If so, those rules take precedence, but any questions regarding what the California corporate code requires is beyond the scope of RONR and this forum.
  8. Josh Martin

    Orders (Instructions to Employees)

    “In organizations with employees, the assembly or the board can give instructions to an employee in the form of an order, which is written just as a resolution except that the word "Ordered" is used in place of the word "Resolved." An example would be: "Ordered, That the steward obtain impoundment of all unauthorized vehicles found parked on the club premises." (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 110)
  9. Josh Martin

    Open Forum

    Minutes are required for all parts of a meeting, but the minutes are a record of what was done, not what was said, at least so far as RONR is concerned. So it may be that nothing occurs during open forum which is to be recorded in the minutes.
  10. As I previously stated, nothing may be disclosed from an executive session without the assembly’s consent. When this executive session actually occurs, a member cannot even disclose his own vote, let alone the votes of others (whether those votes are for or against). As Mr. Brown suggests, there are potential complications in applying these rules to members stating how they intend to vote in a meeting which has not yet occurred. In this particular case, however, the upcoming executive session is a continuation of an executive session which has already occurred. If this motion was originally made in executive session, even the existence and wording of the motion itself is secret unless that has been disclosed. In any event, the arguments in debate are certainly secret, unless they have been disclosed.
  11. Yes, of course, because this is the proper course of action regardless of when the candidate became ineligible or when the ballots were cast. Illegal votes are still counted in the total. Whether this person was ineligible or was eligible and declined makes no difference at this point.
  12. Nothing that happens in an executive session may be disclosed outside of executive sssion, unless the assembly agrees to do so, by majority vote. So I think the answer is “no.”
  13. So far as RONR is concerned, another round of voting would be required, since the candidate who received a majority declined the election. Even if he was ineligible, that would not change anything, since votes for ineligible candidates are treated as illegal votes, which are included in the total. It’s possible that the rules in your bylaws would change this, but I don’t think so, since a majority vote is still required (at least in the first round), and there does not appear to be any special rules about how to count votes for ineligible candidate. What is said in some other organization’s bylaws on this subject is irrelevant. This is not, however, a special election - it is a continuation of the same election. In the ordinary case, the society could (but need not) reopen nominations, and write-in votes would be in ordèr. The potential complication is how this interacts with your runoff rules (assuming those rules are, in fact, in your bylaws).
  14. Josh Martin

    President serving on a committee

    Yes. See FAQ #2.
  15. Josh Martin

    National Bylaws vs. Chapter Bylaws

    In the ordinary case, the national organization does not itself amend the bylaws of constituent units, although it may well be that amendments to the bylaws of the national organization will require amendments to the bylaws of constituent units. In such a case, the constituent units must still vote on such amendments, even although they do not really have a choice in the matter.
×