Atul Kapur

The member may challenge the draft minutes as they stand, but as Mr. Martin has noted, it sounds like the error was not in the minutes but during the meeting itself. So correcting the minutes is not the way to try to correct the error of declaring the motion defeated. Is there a reason that the motion cannot be introduced and voted on again?

If the motion is debatable (as main motions are) it can be debated before voting. "Delay to a later meeting": use the motion Postpone to a Certain Time. You can postpone it to the next regular meeting, as long as that meeting occurs before the end of the third month from now, which is called the "quarterly time interval". So if the meeting were held today, June 18, you can postpone it to the next meeting if it is scheduled on or before September 30. "Refer to a sub-committee": use the motion to Refer.

RONR says that, "voting by proxy should not be permitted unless the state’s corporation law—as applying to nonstock corporations—absolutely requires it." (RONR 11th ed., p. 429, lines 6-9) It also says that, "An organization should never adopt a bylaw permitting a question to be decided by a voting procedure in which the votes of persons who attend a meeting are counted together with ballots mailed in by absentees [which would include proxies]." (p. 423, lines 25-28) precisely because, "the absentee ballots would in most cases be on a somewhat different question than that on which those present were voting, leading to confusion, unfairness, and inaccuracy in determining the result." p. 423, lines 32-35 So I'm not going to answer the main questions. Your HOA will have to figure out how to sort it out. You tell us that your bylaws provide for nominations from the floor. So I don't see a problem with write-ins, unless there is a specific provision in your bylaws that prohibits them.

Just as you can't be in two places at once, you can't be running two meetings simultaneously. If you want to have one meeting, you could consolidate or merge the associations, but I'm assuming there is something preventing you from doing that. And whatever that reason is, it's likely the same reason why you want to keep the business of the two associations separate.

I had the same question, but it looks like the two incumbents whose terms hadn't expired were elected to the Chairman and Vice-Chairman offices, creating vacancies in the secretary and treasurer positions. However, @blk28, Mr. Lages' question raises the point of term length. It sounds like the new secretary is filling the vacancy created by the incumbent secretary's elevation. Depending on the details in your bylaws and this complicated situation, the secretary's term likely ends in 2022, two years from now rather than four. It may be similar for whoever fills the vice-chairman office.

I hadn't noticed that Guest John S had tacked on to an older thread.

First, I agree with Mr. Mervosh that a motion on the 19th would be in order and that this would be a motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted (ASPA). The question of whether this rewards those who have not yet paid and whether this is fair to those who have already paid is an argument to be made in debate. I don't have enough details to decide whether the original motion is still in force after the 19th. My inclination is that any motion as of the 20th would be a new one, rather than an ASPA. The other important point that would need to be considered is how to handle anyone in arrears. A new motion should be explicit about forgiveness of any late fees or penalties that may have accumulated.

She is not a member of the commission so has no authority to insist on anything (even if they had been her points). The Board of Commissioners, on the other hand, has directed you to talk to her and they have the authority to direct you to do so. They, presumably, will be the body that approves the minutes. Why don't you talk to her and find out exactly what her specific concerns are? Then you can go back to the recording and see if any changes make sense. You can draft a memo to the commission outlining her specific concerns and the changes you made in response or your rationale for not making the change based on your review of the recording. Yes, this means scrapping the re-draft that you already did. Sorry. I assume that by "discussion minutes" you mean that they include a summary of the discussions that occurred. I agree with you and Mr. Brown that these are problematic and should be discouraged. However, sometimes public bodies prefer them. Good Luck.

Another possibility is that they are bound by law which uses the "50% + 1" language. That is the situation for many Corporation Acts that I have seen.

First, what do your bylaws say about resignations? RONR says that they need to be accepted but your bylaws may say that they are effective when sent or received. Second, what do your bylaws say about how vacancies are filled? They often give the board the authority to fill vacancies. If they are silent, then RONR says that the body that elected the officers is the body that fills the vacancy. Third, do you bylaws specifically say that the Vice-Chairman does not ascend to the Chairman office if it is vacant? Or are they silent about what happens if the Chairman's office is vacant (differentiating that from the situation you describe where the Chairman is simply absent at meetings)? If they are silent, RONR says that "In case of the resignation or death of the president, the vice-president ... automatically becomes president for the unexpired term, unless the bylaws expressly provide otherwise for filling a vacancy in the office of president." (RONR 11th ed., p. 458, lines 8-13). If they are silent, then the current Vice-Chairman ascends to become the Chairman for the rest of the current term (assuming that the current Chairman's resignation was accepted). You will then have a vacancy (again) in the office of Vice-Chairman. This person may still also be the current treasurer, if their resignation was not accepted. There is no prohibition in RONR to holding both positions.

1) Are electronic meetings authorized in your bylaws? 2) do you normally send your ballot out to every member of the association or do you normally just do your elections by ballot at a meeting and only those members who are at the meeting get a ballot? Again, it would be helpful to know exactly what your bylaws say about these elections.

As an emergency physician, I tell them that if they don't like a mask, they really won't like a breathing tube and ventilator. [non-RONR digression over]

Except that Mr. Brown's quote refers to the situation before the chair has rendered their decision. A point of order can only be raised after the ruling has been given.

Zoom has Arizona as a separate option when I'm choosing a Time Zone to schedule a meeting. Windows also recognizes Arizona. Canadian content: They both also recognize Saskatchewan as a separate time zone (SK stays on Central Standard Time year-round, so = CST or MDT). Gut shabbos to you, as well. I assume that hasn't started for you as yet, but I guess that depends on what time it is. 😀 And I hope the situation in Arizona with the outbreak is sparing you and yours.

In parliamentary terms, it sounds like one or two things happened: the motion was either Postponed to the next meeting (if the questions will be answered by then) or was Withdrawn (if they won't be answered by then). It sounds like whichever action was taken, it was done by general consent. How large is your board? If "there are not more than about a dozen members present," then modified rules apply (RONR 11th ed., p. 477-478, including lines 27-28, where the above quote is found). Under these rules, "When a proposal is perfectly clear to all present, a vote can be taken without a motion’s having been introduced." (p. 478, lines 9-10) and, since it appears to have been done by unanimous consent, you didn't need to take a formal vote, "Unless agreed to by unanimous consent, however, all proposed actions must be approved by vote under the same rules as in larger meetings" (p. 478, lines 11-13) So the proposal to Postpone or Withdraw the motion was voted upon without a motion being introduced and adopted by unanimous consent. Be careful to ensure that the proposal is/was perfectly clear to every member and that there truly is/was no objection. Otherwise, these provisions could be abused to adversely affect the rights of members.

There are other options which may lead to a more efficient resolution. You have four separate proposals which are all aimed at addressing the same situation. You could refer the question of how to address the situation to a committee and include in the instructions that they consider the four proposals and come back with a recommendation (if necessary, the instructions could explicitly say that the committee is free to combine the ideas in the proposals and that the committee is not limited to those four). You could do something similar with the entire assembly by moving into Committee of the Whole or quasi-Committee of the Whole. It would be easier to take either of these actions if you amended the agenda to add, before you deal with any of these motions, the question of "How should we address this situation"

Does it have to be in the bylaws or would a Special Rule of Order suffice? @Brian McMillan, I agree with Mr. Mervosh that, whether it's in the by-laws or a special rule, only the membership can place any of those types of restrictions on a membership meeting. As you become more familiar with RONR, you will find that there are many ways to handle this if you are concerned about the membership being unprepared for this motion. For example, you could have moved to Postpone it until the next meeting, depending on when the next meeting will be held, or to Refer it to a committee or the board to consider it in-depth then report back to a future membership meeting.

And if that raises the question, "What time zone do we put in the meeting notice?" look two posts above this one. In the example that Mr. Merritt uses, I believe Central time zone is used because that is where the headquarters of the association is located.

The only option that I can think of that would avoid possible embarrassment would be a ballot. Is that what you're suggesting? I'm not sure why this particular motion would be embarrassing to oppose, though. Reading the OP again, I believe that the motion could simply be that the assembly support the Pledge. The pledge could be in the body of the motion, or the resolution, but by adopting the motion, the members are not making the pledge themselves. Each individual faculty member would take the Pledge separately from the motion.

Pick one thst makes sense. Options include: Where is the headquarters of the association? Use that time zone. Where is the presiding officer located? Use that time zone. If it's worldwide, consider using Universal Coordinated Time (UTC), which has the benefit of not having to figure out whether a particular time zone is on Daylight Savings Time (aka "Summer Time") or not.

You can install the program onto your computer. By the way, the 12th edition is scheduled to be released in September (or late August) and there may be changes in the versions that are available.

The commonest answer on this forum is: "Consider dissolving the organization." This is a sign of lack of adequate interest in the organization. The ramifications of this can often spark enough interest to generate volunteers. Alternatively, nominate people. Even though they may not have thought of it themselves, if nominated or, taking it the next step, if elected, they may agree to serve.

A couple of points. While others have said that this could be a standing or a special committee, the way it is described seems to be more in keeping with a standing committee. "Standing committees are constituted to perform a continuing function" (RONR 11th ed., p. 490, lines 32-33) and this seems to be a continuing function, unless there will be no more graduations, weddings, showers, etc. or the organization decides to stop sending cards for these events. I also noted the comment: I don't think a committee needs to deliberate in order to be a committee. "A committee, as understood in parliamentary law, is a body of one or more persons, elected or appointed by (or by direction of) an assembly or society, to consider, investigate, or take action on certain matters or subjects, or to do all of these things." (p. 489, lines 23-24, emphasis added). This committee's duty appears to be to take action. That would seem to be enough, unless I'm missing something. A question arises that goes beyond @Angie N's query. Can it be assumed that the committee has been appointed "with power" even if it is not explicitly mentioned in the bylaws? In other words, do those two words need to be in the description of the committee or can the assigned duties make it clear that the committee has the power to take all steps to carry out its instructions?

It's happened to almost all of this on this forum at least once. I invented and am trying to popularize the acronym IDHTBIFOM ("I Don't Have The Book In Front Of Me"). Or, perhaps the unabridged acronym, IDHTBIFOMBIIRC ("But If I Recall Correctly")?

Except on page 162, lines 9-19, where it explains how a "friendly amendment" should be handled.