Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Tapestry

Members
  • Posts

    38
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location:
    USA

Recent Profile Visitors

512 profile views

Tapestry's Achievements

  1. @Atul Kapur and @Gary Novosielski Thank you both for your additional guidance.
  2. Thanks @Gary Novosielski, et al. I'm still grappling with the concept of one ballot being both legal and illegal at the same time, but I'll get there.
  3. @Richard Brown I understand the ballot remains in the count of ballots cast. I'm not certain one vote should be credited to B and I am of the mind (right now) it is an illegal vote.
  4. If the one person who tried to vote twice, marking two votes for B, the entire ballot is invalid, correct? Edited to add: RONR (12th ed.) 45:32 "... Similarly, a ballot that contains votes for too many candidates for a given office is counted as one illegal vote cast for that office, because it is not possible for the tellers to determine which candidate(s) the voter prefers." There shouldn't be any confusion for the teller to determine the candidate here, but does that then mean, the teller can simply subtract the one vote and leave one vote or is the entire ballot still considered illegal?
  5. Ahh, rereading a few times, I see where it is in the OP motion. The emphasis with "my motion" is mine.
  6. @Atul KapurI'm getting the impression the OP is the secretary as they mention "record" several times in the post, "on the record", "for the record", "for record",... Here again, I can surely be mistaken as to their position and they are not the secretary, but could be the mover of the motion itself.
  7. Their first sentence says the organization (I read membership) has a hard time stating the motions. It goes on in the next to say the president will state (phrase) the motions how they should be stated, and the secretary follows up with "so moved" so that the motion will be correct in the minutes. What is missing here is who is named as the mover, the president, the secretary, or the member whom they are helping phrase the motion. Not that I can't be mistaken, but as it is now, it seems clear to me the secretary is using the term "so moved" simply to "so note" they have the motion correct in the minutes. I do agree with you @Gary Novosielskithe intent of "so moved" but that isn't how they are using it.
  8. It appears to me as if the secretary is saying "so moved" to indicate they have the motion correctly stated in the minutes. If this is the purpose/reason for "so moved" I suggest something such as, "so noted" (or something as generic) if the secretary wants to verbally indicate to the president and the membership they have the motion correctly stated for the minutes.
  9. Is Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (RONR) your parliamentary authority? Do your bylaws permit the Board of Directors to make these types of decisions? Who elects the Board of Directors? If the members elect the Board of Directors, I would say the Board of Directors is subordinate to the membership and the membership can decide which way to go - if there are no other provisions (bylaws, state, county, municipal,... authorities) which would override the membership from doing so. You say there hasn't been any communication made available regarding liability. Perhaps this could be the starting point - find out if this indeed is a real concern and something which needs to be addressed.
  10. In addition to what has already been mentioned, the secretary will ... "In the absence of the president and vice-president, to call the meeting to order and preside until the immediate election of a chairman pro tem." RONR (12th ed.) 47:33 (11) Should there be co-secretaries, which would be called upon?
  11. So, in your example, the Finance Committee and the Awards Committee would not overlap and each raise funds for the planned awards. They would leave this, fundraising, up to the fundraising committee, correct?
  12. Thank you, @Josh Martinfor your valued input. It's much appreciated!
  13. Thank you, @Rob Elsman! The process going forward, as you've outlined it, makes sense to me and I appreciate the feedback from you and @Josh Martin.
×
×
  • Create New...