Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

671 profile views
  1. Once the motion is made (and seconded, if required), the motion is in the hands of the assembly, and the maker of the motion is no longer necessary for the deliberation and voting on the motion, unless that member is needed for quorum.
  2. My assembly has had a few instances where documents instating or amending policy, which are recommended by a committee, have been moved for adoption and contain errors that appear to be of the nature of copyedits—whether a missing word or punctuation, a misspelling, or of accidentally using policy terms no longer used by the assembly. Sometimes these needed edits seem insubstantial, for example, there are two consecutive “the”s, and one needs to be stricken. Sometimes the substantiality of the edit is not immediately clear, like the insertion of a comma or adding a conforming amendment to the
  3. For some reason my most recent post appears with a long strike-out. This was not intended, and I am unable to edit out the strikeout.
  4. The question I read the OP making is: does an assembly need a formal trial to impose (even a relatively minor) penalty? p. 644 states that "formal disciplinary measures should generally be regarded as a drastic step reserved for serious situations (ll. 8-10). RONR states that conduct which "tend to injure the good nature of the organization, disturb its well-being, or hamper it in its work" is a serious office. At the same time, RONR goes on to say "It is usually in the best interests of the organization first to make every effort to obtain a satisfactory solution of the matter quietly an
  5. My understanding is that unless there are special rules, bylaws, statutory laws, etc. that supersede the parliamentary authority, than the parliamentary authority provides the rules to follow. In this case, assuming RONR is a adopted parliamentary authority, that means Chapter 20 is necessary unless other rules have been adopted. I would guess that the type of situation you are describing is one reason RONR includes the final paragraph of that chapter, namely p. 669, ll. 32-36: "...having a Committee on Discipline has the advantages of not unduly inconveniencing the society, and of promot
  6. I might also add that RONR gives to the presiding officer the prerogative of ruling on all questions of order, subject to appeal by the assembly. I have seen an instance where an assembly believes that RONR grants the parliamentarian some authority to rule on questions of order. But this is not the case. I say all of this this to underscore and extend what Mr. Martin stated: the Parliamentarian's role is only advisory; so, it would indeed be odd for the President, as presiding officer, to be his official advisor to himself.
  7. RONR states that "a particular practice may sometimes come to be followed as a matter of established custom so that it is practically treated as if it were prescribed by rule. If there is no contrary provision in the parliamentary authority or written rules of the organization, the established custom should be adhered to unless the assembly, by majority vote, agrees in a particular instance to do otherwise. However, if a customary practice is or becomes in conflict with the parliamentary authority or any written rule, and a Point of Order citing the conflict is raised at any time, the custom f
  8. I had read that, but I think I misread this critical line in SDC 6, which I believe now clears up my remaining confusion: "Thus, a motion to Rescind can be amend, for example, by substituting for it a motion to amend what is proposed to be rescinded." Thank you all for pointing me in the right direction. I seem to be finding myself in situations lately that require me to draw from the finer and, perhaps, more rarely drawn upon points of procedure, and I am not yet at the level where those are close to being mastered.
  9. Thank you Mr. Brown. I had read those sections but unfortunately they did not bring any additional clarity. Let me see if I can provide an example: Last meeting, an assembly adopts a paragraph motion about the planning of events, which includes the motion "that all events must be done in pastel colors." At the next meeting, Member A says that the events committee was out to purchase paint and was unable to confidently ascertain what counts for a pastel color, so Member A member moves "to amend the motion 'that all events must be done in pastel colors' by adding the words 'produced by The
  10. Colleagues-- A motion is made to amend something previously adopted. A rationale is provided for the amendment, pointing to a general problematic issue in the previously adopted motion, and the amendment is moved and seconded. During debate, a motion is made to refer the question to a standing committee whose charges include making recommendations on the subject of the motion to be amended. 1) Is the motion to amend something previously adopted considered a main motion (I ask, because the motion to amend is typically a subsidiary motion)? Is the main motion the question being brought
  11. I see that now after rereading the RONR section on executive boards. Thank you!
  12. I think that the OI Mr. Brown referenced (http://www.robertsrules.com/interp_list.html#2006_13) would indicate that even a board given full power and authority to do something in the by-laws (in that OI, the powers the board is given would seem to be standard ones written in by-laws), their actions can nonetheless be countermanded.
  13. This OI is quite germane and helpful. It not only gives guidance on my original question in this post but also helps me clear up some confusion regarding what it means for the assembly's oversight of a committee when a committee is appointed "with power". Thank you. I guess this is a reason why a committee might want hold a hearing, or make a report on color choice before purchasing paint, if the committee thinks there might be any disagreement with the assembly over the colors 😉 . It does seem like 2/3-vote would be most appropriate, and I guess it would be up to the assembly
  14. If a committee is charged (but not given "full power") to take particular actions on behalf of the assembly, and the committee acts on that charge within the proper scope of that charge, but the assembly disagrees with a particular action already taken in accordance with that charge, can the assembly countermand the action? If not, are there any other options available aside from further instructions or amending the charges for the future?
  15. Hello, friends-- First, thank you all for the help you've provided me in the past; it has been indispensable to helping me fulfill the duties of parliamentarian for my society. I have what I think is a very quick, non-urgent question. I have looked through RONR 11th and can't seem to find a direct answer to this: If the procedure for the appointment of chairs of standing committees is not established in the by-laws (or anywhere else for that matter), and the committee chair's seat vacates after the initial appointment of a chair (for example, when the committee chair's term is up), i
  • Create New...