Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Atul Kapur

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Atul Kapur

  • Rank
    PRP, formerly "Student"

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I recall previous threads that have touched on this situation, including the fact that a judge said that things were okay the way they had been done. It would appear let you wish to challenge the judicial ruling. You will need to speak with the lawyer about that.
  2. That would probably put the opinion on a stronger foundation and make it easier for members to understand and accept the rationale behind it. But it is not strictly necessary.
  3. The assembly interprets only if there is some ambiguity. No one who has responded believes there is ambiguity on the need for quorum for your RC to be able to act.
  4. An inquorate meeting does not have the authority of a meeting of the Representative Council. Stop. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200. Definitely do not consider a motion other than those that an inquorate meeting is allowed to consider.
  5. The idea of notice is that the members entitled to attend the meeting can be aware of what is going to be coming up. The idea that the agenda can be modified would, depending on the details, nullify this intent. However, it does give you flexibility - perhaps enough to get the business done in one meeting. Both Guest Zev and Mr. Mervosh have given you good options. The details of which are possible depends on the details of your own rules.
  6. Atul Kapur


    Or look deeper into why you are having trouble achieving quorum. Since this is a board meeting that is having trouble, you could consider an attendance requirement for board members.
  7. Look up "discharge a committee" in RONR. The Board can take an item back from a committee but there is either a notice requirement or a higher voting threshold than usual to do so.
  8. It could take five votes, if each of the Resolved and preamble were amended twice. (Or seven votes if there are three amendments each, etc). But the point we're all trying to emphasize is that the vote on an amendment is different from a vote on the Resolved portion. At that point, you're only voting on the amendment, not on the entire Resolved portion. The way you are expressing it leads to confusion.
  9. Let me try again. If there are no amendments to the Resolveds (just some debate) then once the debate is completed you move, without taking any vote, to the preamble. ("Is there any further debate on the Resolved clauses? There being none, we move to consideration of the preamble.") Similarly, if there is no amendment moved on the preamble, then once that debate is complete you take one vote on the entire resolution. If there is an amendment, say to one of the Resolved clauses, you process the amendment but you still do not vote on the Resolved section as a whole before proceeding to the preamble: ("Is there any further debate on the Resolved clauses as amended? There being none, we move to consideration of the preamble.")
  10. It sounds like it will be a little more complicated than that, because ballots are stated as already having been sent out. This implies that the election is done outside of the meeting. I agree, though, that the members are going to need to take action at a meeting in order to affect this process. If the results are going to be announced at the annual meeting, then members may need to call for a special meeting before the annual meeting, assuming that the bylaws allow for special meetings.
  11. Notice the corrections I made to the quote . You amend the Resolved portion but you do not vote to approve it at that point. You then open the preamble / Whereas portion to amendment but, again, do not vote on it until: "After any amendment of the preamble, a single vote is taken on the question of adopting the entire resolution ..." (RONR 11th ed., p 139, lines 12-14)
  12. A lot of the answers to your questions will be found in or depend on the exact wording of your bylaws. " The board will be filling the pres-elect position with an interim then in January we will need to vote as a membership body to fill the position of president." Does the board have the authority in the bylaws to fill vacancies? Do your bylaws say what to do in the event that there is a vacancy in the office of president-elect? " Would it be appropriate for the current president to serve a second term (after vote approval)? or better for the VP to skip the pres-elect term and move to presidency?" Do your bylaws allow your president to serve more than one term? If so, then the decision on whom to choose is up to your association. And I don't see that it is necessarily limited to those two. I have my opinion on what would be the better option, but it's the opinion of your members that counts. " If the current pres serves a second term then what about our position on the board of "immediate past president"?" If your president serves a second term then you still have the same immediate-past-president who you had before. This position doesn't become a "president's free pick".
  13. Thank you. I look forward to reviewing them.
  14. Do you have citations for these cases ?
  15. Not that anyone asked, but it's worth noting that nothing stopped any other member from making the motion at the first meeting. Usually you allow the person who gave notice to move the motion, but anyone can.
  • Create New...