Chris Harrison

In the future if this happens again (and you all want to get rid of this person) someone should immediately move to accept the resignation and then accept it. Of course, this assumes the Board is authorized to accept resignations and fill the vacancy (RONR p. 467 ll. 25-34).

As soon as a member or the Chair realizes there is no longer a quorum they should raise a Point of Order saying so. The problem with continuing to conduct business when there is no quorum is it can very difficult to determine when exactly the meeting went inquorate and absent some "clear and convincing" proof there was not a quorum when the vote was taken the Chair would need to rule the Point of Order Not Well Taken (RONR p. 349).

I think that depends on exactly you want to get out of this and how difficult it would be to remove him from his office. One option would be to speak against accepting the resignation and then voting it down after which follow whatever procedures are required to remove him from office. Another option would be to allow the resignation to go through and then introduce a motion censuring him for whatever misdeeds he is accused to committing.

I suspect Jay is referring to any applicable laws governing the organization's non-profit status.

Nothing in RONR would prohibit the President serving as Treasurer as well. However, check your rules to make sure they don't have something to say on the subject. As for it being a conflict of interest it would be up to you all to determine if such a conflict (if you determine one exists) should prevent him from pulling double duty.

Though that could be problematic depending on when the next General Body meeting is. If the Board is proceeding with the building project there may be a point when fully putting the brakes on everything may become (much) more complicated than the General Body just saying "We don't approve of this." Is there a mechanism for the General Body to call a Special Meeting to deal with this sooner than later?

Were you at the Board meeting when the resolution was adopted? The resolution as you quoted it seems a bit off because while the first sentence makes sense the second sentence "An approval from General Body satisfying HTGC Constitution” doesn't as much. Is it possible that what is in the second sentence is actually supposed to be part of the conditions mentioned in the first? So the Board is merely getting the ball rolling with the conditions attached being 1) that the entire amount is to be raised prior to the start of the project and 2) the General Body's approval is also required in order to satisfy the HTGC Constitution.

I can't speak to whether the forum can be modified to do what you are asking. However, two ideas come to mind. 1) Create a document listing the title names and link to the URLs of the threads you want to be able to reference later. Or, 2) Depending on the browser you use (I use Firefox) you can probably create a folder for forum topics you want to be able to reference later and "bookmark" (or "favorite") whatever you are interested in.

Only members of the body which is meeting have any rights. So at a Board meeting only Board members have any rights (unless your rules say otherwise of course). Assuming these people are Board members the default speaking time is twice per question per day with 10 minute speeches (your rules may say otherwise). If a member is using profanity the Chair or another member can call him or her to order. As for "bullying their point of view" that is a very subjective thing. A member can strenuously advocate for their position from one meeting to another while following the rules and proper decorum and that wouldn't necessarily be "bullying."

In larger assembles two reasons why it would be a good idea come to mind. First, a person's voice will carry better when they are standing as opposed to sitting. With a lot of people in the room that could be helpful to make sure the people farther away can hear him or her. Also, having the person who is speaking to the assembly stand allows everyone to see who is talking to them and to orient their attention onto him or her.

Probably because they are using the term "tabled" differently that RONR does. That or they didn't know there is a motion to Take From The Table.

Yes. For one thing you won't have to deal with that pesky CAPTCHA test every time you want to post something. Also, you can edit your posts where a guest can't (I'm not sure if the recent issues with regular posters being able to edit has been resolved). One other plus, though it is more for the other posters than it is for you, is if you plan to contribute regularly having an account allows others to see your post count. If I were new to the forum with little knowledge about parliamentary procedure (and the resumes of people who contribute here) I would probably lend more credence to the reply of someone who has posted here hundreds or thousands of times over someone who is posting as a guest.

RONR have no rules prohibiting it.

Nothing in RONR would give a single member (Board or otherwise) such extreme power.

In theory the elections would be null and void upon a member raising a Point of Order that no quorum was present when the elections were held. However, in practice the Chair should rule the Point Not Well Taken unless the member was able to provide "clear and convincing" proof that there was not a quorum (RONR p. 349 ll. 21-28).

If I recall correctly (haven't had my coffee yet ) this is a HOA Board. If that is the case, I would suggest you bring these issues up to the General Membership at a Membership meeting and maybe they can somehow get the Board to follow the rules (though I won't hold my breath that anything would change when no one is watching). If the Membership can't or won't do anything or you want to do something with more teeth, you should check into whether there are any applicable laws or governmental agencies that deal with HOAs and their Boards that can put legal pressure to force them to behave. Of course, these steps may help with any procedural issues but I suspect they won't be able to do much with any interpersonal dynamics at play. I know from personal experience that pain, anxiety, and depression can be made far worse by stress and I can tell you get more than a little stressed by this whole thing. You may need to ask yourself if assuming you are successful in getting the Board reined in would it be a Pyrrhic victory (you win the battle/war but to the detriment of your health and sanity).

If the Bylaws name RONR as the parliamentary authority then RONR is the organization's parliamentary authority. If the Bylaws name something else as the parliamentary authority then that text is the organization's parliamentary authority. If the Bylaws don't name a parliamentary authority then the general parliamentary law applies which RONR (for the most part) is a codification of (RONR p. xxix).

Unless the candidate is very popular and the hope is that if he's elected he could be talked into accepting the office. Worst case is he declines the office and they have to vote again which may or may not be an undue burden on the assembly.

Usually a motion to censure would be considered under New Business unless it is coming from earlier items of business. Correct. I don't know if I would go so far as to say he cannot preside over it but he absolutely should turn over the chair to the VP. If he refuses to do so you all can suspend the rules to turn over the chair to someone else even against the President's wishes. That requires a 2/3 vote. Yes (RONR p. 407-408). Just so you all are aware, unless your bylaws say otherwise an adopted motion to censure carries no disciplinary effect beyond the assembly saying "we aren't happy with something you did (or didn't do)." In other words, it would be merely a slap on the wrist for someone who has allegedly committed "numerous violations of our bylaws and failure to follow most rules in our adopted parliamentary authority (i.e., RONR)."

Do your bylaws specifically provide for a parliamentarian? Or is there just usually someone on the Board who is knowledgeable in parliamentary procedure that the Chair and other Board members look to for advice?

The Secretary would call the meeting to order and preside over the election of a Chair pro tem.

You must have some fun meetings if the whole Board gets arrested (several times) for assault! Are you a union for UFC fighters?

If there is a member speaking on the question should the Chair announce the adjournment at 4:30 on the dot or wait until the member has finished speaking?

The default method of voting is by voice (RONR p. 44) so there is no need to "force" anything. If this committee wants the vote held via ballot one of their members can make a motion to that effect. Majority rules. You don't. The purpose of a ballot vote is so members can keep which way they vote secret. Having the Chair say "Alright, everyone who (secretly) voted for the motion stand... be seated. Everyone who voted against it stand..." would kind of defeat the purpose.

The first question is if an applicable law or your bylaws permits proxy voting? If so, I don't see anything inherently unethical about the President naming himself as the proxy holder as long as it is clear that another member can be designated instead of him. I will point out that in order to maintain his impartiality the President shouldn't be voting unless it is by ballot or when his vote would affect the outcome of the election (though since it is an election I suspect the vote will be by ballot).