Drake Savory

That was my impression too. Most members would not know what exactly a rule of order is so it looks like they tried to be more specific but they mucked it up even more. Does business transactions relate to administration outside a meeting like if the bylaws ay the Treasure is to pay all bill the last week of the month? And are there standing rules in the bylaws? That would seem to conflict with 2:23(2).

Actually, under the OP's bylaw amendment wouldn't any motion to do X in a meeting with less than 25% attendance (assuming quorum meet) be passed even if everyone their voted no?

I just want to check to make sure I have this process down right. As soon as a motion to Reconsider and Enter Into the Minutes is moved and seconded all consideration on RaEItM stops until the next day. In other words, RaEItM is not debated or voted on but rather immediate moves a motion to Reconsider (or postpones the existing Reconsider on the floor if there is one) to be brought up the next day. Is that correct?

Rule 9:26 is what bans revealing information to nonmembers As for divulging information to members not present, Rule 47:36 gives them the right to review the minutes of executive sessions so the implication is that the information of what occurred can be shared with them.

What exactly do your rules say about calling special meetings and notice required?

And when and where? Could you publicly take the oath of office before the meeting?

Why not just move to Postpone Indefinitely? Why suspend the rules to do so?

Didn't we have a long thread in the Advanced section of the forum where almost everyone agreed you can't take action without a quorum other than actions to obtain a quorum which due to reality are going to fail. Here it is: https://robertsrules.forumflash.com/topic/39642-vacancies-blocking-quorum/ Although in that one the problem dealt with members not showing up. Are you claiming that if the problem is lack of members (e.g. quorum is 30 members but there are only 23 members and there must be a quorum to accept new members) then the rules of quorum do not apply? As Rob Elsman said in that thread

I agree with Mr. Gerber and that it falls under the body's right to assign charges to a committee. Assuming this survey does not fall under one of the charges given already to a committee, the motion would be something like, "I move to charge [pick one of the two committees] to send out a survey regarding tee times."

And to add, to properly kill a motion you use Postpone Indefinitely.

Motion to Postpone to a Certain Time

Or nobody since no one voted against the motion. Just like a person who abstains on a non 0-0 vote cannot move to reconsider.

Is that a quote from the minutes? Unless you have a special rule, you do not include who seconded the motion unless the assembly directs the Secretary to do that.

Yes but which class is the relevant one that needs a quorum?

Except as written one could interpret it was meant to refer to one of the classes. I think we can all agree it is poorly written and quite ambiguous.

Basically a quorum of Class A has already voted and approved the amendment so if only one class is the "relevant class" for the second vote - why would it be Class A again?

Nope. For it to go to Class A and B it has already been passed by Class A so if a quorum is needed to ratify the bylaws amendment then a quorum of them should be requires as a quorum of Class A has already shown they approve of it.

Except "class" is singular. If I were a member and given what the OP has posted I would interpret it as a majority of class B only but as we always say, it is up to them to decide what it means.

What about if the assembly voted (2/3) to remove the day/time/place/etc. out of the bylaws completely. Then they could pass a standing rule as to day/time/place/etc. by a majority vote. This also has the advantage that day/time/place/etc. can be changed simply through Amend Something Previously Adopted which is much simpler in most cases than passing a(nother) bylaws amendment.

Doesn't this imply that a member can vote against preferring charges or expelling themselves?

And the Previous Question is out of order in committee. 16:4

Why shouldn't they? There is no problem with them voting on their appointment to an office and that could be considered "a direct personal ... interest not common to other members of the organization"

Under 50:26 committees (unless authorized) cannot make their own rules. What is the extent of that ban? Can a committee still make rules for the running of their meetings such as "The Vice-Chair shall act as recording secretary." or "The committee shall meet every 3rd Thursday at 7pm at the lodge-house."?

I would assume because the immediate past president is just that. No other past president can be the last one to have served as President before the current one. So if the current President were to die in office, there would be no immediate past president to serve on the Board. How do your bylaws define "immediate past president"?

Depending on the OP's definition of "discriminatory" and "exclusionary", the motion may also violate basic Parliamentary Law. For example, "I move that no member of (insert political party here) be allowed to vote on the main motion."