Chris Harrison

17 minutes ago, Guest bdfsdi1 said:

I have just reviewed the bill book from last month and noticed the check + contract listing the true price, hundreds of dollars less.

...At which point my next question to the Treasurer would be where is the excess $500? 

1 hour ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

Won't happen (at least for another decade or so).

Meaning the 12th Edition won't be out for another decade or so?  Or this would go into the (lucky) 13th Edition?

It is unclear what exactly the circumstances of your situation are.  Can you please clarify your question with more details on how your bylaws specify business is conducted outside of a meeting?

There is also a comma missing after "home" in the second sentence.

It may or may not be proper depending on the circumstances.  Can you give us an example?

You are correct.  The presiding officer has a duty to remain impartial (RONR pp. 394-395).  If she wishes to enter into debate (or otherwise show partiality) she should turn the chair over to the Vice President. 

I would say yes if it had to do with the business of the organization.

Well, as Gary Novosielski and I both asked how does the Board think it has the authority to invalidate the election in the first place?  Is there something in the bylaws granting them that authority?  Just because the Board took it upon themselves to do so doesn't mean they actually have the power to make it stick.

1 hour ago, Josh Martin said:

Yes. A Point of Order is used to call attention to a particular breach of order, not to point out a laundry list of issues.... I do not think it would be proper to combine breaches of different rules into a single Point of Order.)

How would a member handle that situation?  Raise a Point of Order on (alleged) Infraction #1, the Chair rules, and the assembly deals with any Appeal?  Then rinse and repeat with all other (alleged) infractions?

Yes.

The first question is if your bylaws specifically permit absentee voting (which using an e-vote site would be)?  If they don't then you can't do it (RONR pp. 423-424).  Also, under what authority does the Board think it can invalidate the election (or even a part of it)?  

As for whether the entire ballot should have been thrown out due to a suspicion of tampering...that would be up to the members to determine.  Personally I would probably vote to toss it if I had questions about how secure our votes were.  However,  as you can tell by my profile picture I am more of a cat person so I doubt I would be a member of a dog club and so my vote wouldn't be worth much. 

Try page 393 ll. 12-17.

I'm not sure how much help RONR will be with this.  I'm going to make the  assumption that the purpose of this law (and in particular the section limiting what business can be conducted in Executive Session) is to ensure there is transparency in what the organization does.  If that is the case I would suggest you look to the law maybe focusing on any section regarding how to address violations.

Our State's Freedom of Information Act has provisions on how a member of the public (or a member of the body in question) can hold the body accountable for violating the law.  It has some pretty significant civil penalties for anyone who repeatedly or intentionally violates the law.  I have no idea if your law will have teeth like this but check it out.

3 hours ago, .oOllXllOo. said:

Is it a breach of decorum to speak about a possible abuse of power, in order to illustrate the issue, and show any evidence?

That depends on what is being discussed.  I doubt it would be a breach if a motion to censure or otherwise discipline said officer is pending.  It would be more likely to be a breach if the motion pending is whether to order lunch from Pizza Hut or Papa Johns.

Quote

If it is a breach of decorum, then how is the issue to be dealt with,  if someone believes that abuse of power is happening?

See FAQ #20.

Quote

If a trial is the answer, what if the society in question wants to have nothing to do with the process of a trial?

There is very little a single member (or small number of members) can do in the face of the assembly's apathy or fear.

Quote

Is it improper to state the belief that an abuse of power is happening, without making an accusation?

It seems to me that even stating the belief that there is an abuse of power going on means that someone is being accused.

Was there a vote on dissolving the committee? 

RONR doesn't limit what business can be conducted in Executive Session.  If your rules do that would be beyond this forum's scope.

You need to use parliamentary procedure in order to run a meeting as much as you need an operating system to operate a computer.

No operating system means you get absolutely nothing.  You don't even get the "Blue Screen of Death".

The records belong to the organization not the Treasurer.  Depending on whether the Board has the authority to speak for the organization they can send the Treasurer a strongly worded letter demanding the return of the (originals) records (or the General Membership can send the letter).  If the Treasurer still refuses to return the records some options you have are to take legal action (sue) for their return.  Also, since those records belong to the organization I suppose you all could contact the police and request their assistance in getting them back (for law enforcement to get involved the organization may have to be willing to press charges).

I'm assuming the names Donald, Minnie, and Goofy are fill ins for the names of real life people in the organization and aren't fictitious characters.    Otherwise you all have some real big problems. 

Donald is elected (make sure to let Scrooge, Huey, Dewey, and Louie know ).  There is no need (under RONR) to ask anyone whose name was written down if they accept the nomination.  However, if by some chance a write-in candidate were to get elected it would be a good idea as soon as humanly possible to verify he or she is willing to serve because if he or she were to decline you would have an incomplete election and would need to hold another round of ballots to get someone who would be willing.

Generally speaking any alleged violations of the rules need to be pointed out when they occur and it is too late to object later.  However, see RONR p. 251 for exceptions to this rule.

Making a decision based on false information isn't in-of-itself enough to render the vote invalid (under RONR).  However,  you all should definitely look into what actions can be taken against those people who supplied that information (see FAQ #20 regarding officers who took part in it).  As for you calling the Special Meeting and it being denied you will need to look to the exact language regarding how to call one to make sure all "T"s were crossed and all "i"s were dotted.

You need a quorum to conduct any business and how the quorum is determined should be located in your bylaws.  As for removing the President from office see FAQ #20.  However, depending on how complicated it is to remove him it may be simpler to elect someone else when elections come up next.

Probably but see Official Interpretation 2006-17 for further discussion.

Do your bylaws actually specify that in order to be elected office the candidate needs to be a member?  RONR imposes no such requirement.

39 minutes ago, Richard Brown said:

However, the member who wants the motion made may have someone else who IS present make the motion if he can find someone willing to do so.  But the member making the motion will be making it as his own motion, not as a motion of the absent member. 

One thing the member who agrees to present this motion as their own needs to keep in mind is he or she cannot speak against the motion in debate (RONR p. 393).  So, the member needs to be in favor of the motion or at least be willing not to speak against it.

While the motion maker cannot speak against the motion he can vote against it (RONR p. 393 ll. 19-26).