Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Jenn

  1.   A bylaw states a member must attend 9 of 12 meetings to be eligible for an elected office.  The unit only had 11 meetings prior to the election.  At this juncture, is the bylaw enforceable  because the 12 meetings did not occur?  If a member has attended 8, could they argue that the meeting canceled impacted their eligibility?

  2. Does RONR reference  “member at large”?  What is the parliamentary definition for the term? In my limited experience, this classification was assigned  to members who were not affiliated with a subordinate unit (chapter) due to geographical constraints.   I’ve read bylaws that forbade this classification of membership were local units existed. As I study and learn more, I get the impression that my understanding is incorrect.  Please advise and thank you. 

  3. I belong to an organization that does not stipulate the amount of annual dues in the bylaws as outlined in RONR - Article Members. 

    An annual budget is drafted and the Financial Committee recommends the amount for dues under Receivables based on the number of members and obligations the organization must meet to remain financially solvent. The membership votes for the annual budget’s adoption.

    I have a few questions: 

    1. Is this considered a special rule of order? Because dues fees relate to business transactions.

    2. If this is considered a special rule of order should the budget be adopred by  a 2/3 majority?

    3. Are there any other RONR references I should review?

  4. It is a general question regarding standing rules. It would be a rule regarding an administrative process.  No, in this example there would be no existing rule. If there was an existing rule, we would have to use the motion and criteria for amending something previously adopted, correct?

  5. The organization has received recommendations for bylaws changes and disseminated them to the membership in preparation for the annual meeting.  One of the recommendations, which will probably be adopted limits the number of elected officers that come from the same geographical area.  There are no provisions in the bylaws that delay implementation of the bylaws once adopted and bylaws are voted on during the first plenary on the first day.  

    The nominations committee started their work and it is possible that nominees may come from geographical areas that if elected would conflict with the anticipated bylaws adoption. Elections occur during the last plenary on the last day. 

    Should nominees be determined ineligible if they conflict with newly adopted geographical limits? If so, what RONR reference supports this?

    Or are nominees allowed to run for office because the call for nominations were sent prior to the bylaws being adopted? If so, what RONR reference supports this?




  6. I appreciate the responses.  The opinion of some is that this mishap impedes progress towards administrative goals for the next 2 years.   I was curious if there was a parliamentary mechanism to correct and mitigate the impact if a 2/3 majority of the membership was ready to move forward and see changes.  Members who highlighted the late communication were presumably the minority.

  7. Technically speaking and in practice, what does it mean when a vote for  reconsideration is called up. Does it mean that the motion is recorded and added to the Orders of the Day and addressed during the session? Or does debate begin immediately? 

  8. According to the current Bylaws, Recommendations for Bylaws changes are  to be sent 60 days prior to the biannual convention for review by the membership.  They were not.  Aside from an adjourned meeting, what parliamentary tool could have been utilized to consider the Bylaw recommendations during the session?

  9. So, renewals are applied to defeated motions, rather than reconsideration of motions adopted?

    Yes, I have had the opportunity to read Reconsinder-reconsidering something previously adopted and motioned by a member of the prevailing side.  

    Suspend the Rules-2/3 vote in the affirmative

    Amemd Something Previously Adopted-2/3 vote to change and action with certain stipulations.

    Sometimes the writing in RONR is combersome and it is easy to lose the intent of the message when the subject matter is unfamiliar.  I just want to confirm that renewals ((38) relate to lost motions.

  10. I have been ready RONR and I am still unclear on "renewals". Plainly speaking when are renewals applicable since a motion that has been disposed of cannot be brought back up before the assembly unless materially changed?  

  11. I think the reason that there is a sense of entitlement is because presidents in the organization don't change often.  The immediate past president served four 2-year terms.  The predecessor served for 10 years.  Consequently, I perceive that the chairpersons maintain the roles a long time.  

    As for the tenured members and past officers ideas, I have no idea where they get them from. 

  • Create New...