Atul Kapur

I would not invite new proposals. How far in the future did you schedule the adjourned meeting (aka "continuation of the AGM")?

The minutes are the record of what happened at the meeting, not before or after. Also, I agree with Mr. Huynh's reply above.

Even if the organization adopts RONR as its parliamentary authority, the standard order of business only applies if it has not adopted a special order of business and not if "the periods intervening between consecutive regular meetings are usually more than a quarterly time interval." (RONR 11th ed., p. 353, ll. 20-22).

My opinion is that this is not what is being proposed Which seems to match the wording in RONR and advised by Mr. Martin. I do not mean this to suggest that I disagree with the objections of Dr. Stackpole and others about the use of email voting.

This is another way of saying vote. When I Google "definition of poll" I get " noun 1. the process of voting in an election. "the country went to the polls on March 10" Also verb 1. record the opinion or vote of

The board could adopt a motion that it will make efforts to find and "acquire"(odd word choice) an ombudsman. That way its intent will be in the minutes.

The motion can be rescinded at the November, or any other meeting. It obviously won't have an effect on how you started the November meeting, but if it's rescinded you won't start the meeting that way going forward.

Generally, yes, but you should confirm by checking your own bylaws or the motion that created the committee to see its exact authority.

You can add a provision in your bylaws that states you follow the policy adopted by the Parent Organization, is appended to the bylaws. You can further specify in this provision that if the Parent Organization amends the policy, it is that amended policy which automatically applies. Doesn't answer all your questions, but hope it helps.

Can you give an example of such a main motion?

I had the experience of dealing with a governance consultant who renamed all of our committee terms of references as "committee charters." If a change was actually required, (rather than just being done because the consultant needed to show he had done something) "committee mandates" would have been a better term in my view, but apparently this is the latest buzzword. The earlier responses give you a good indication of why this use of the word can be problematic and confusing.

Expanding a bit on the answer in Mr. Mervosh's reference: What you actually did at the first meeting was to Postpone Definitely the motion to the next meeting (aka "postpone to a definite time", in this case the next meeting). At the second meeting, you do not need a motion to bring the postponed item back. It should automatically come up under General Orders. This is a common error, using the word "table" when what you really want to do is postpone definitely. One of the problems with doing that, as has happened here, is that it gets confused with the motion to Lay on the Table. A way to catch if you are making this mistake is to see if you are "tabling" it to a specific time. If you are, then you should really use the word / motion "postpone." An experienced and knowledgeable presiding officer will catch the error and state the motion using the correct term. I agree that it is too late to do anything about it now, but there is nothing to worry about. The debate and outcome of the motion at the second meeting is valid. BTW, if you are looking for the current edition online you will not find it there.

I do not think we have been given any information that suggests ratification is required. The original post does not specify the authority that is given to the chair in this situation, we are only told how the situation is triggered. The words in the ellipsis may require ratification or may give the chair full authority to act on behalf of the committee.

It sounds like the committee has regularly scheduled meetings. Is there any provision for special meetings of this committee? It also sounds like you have a recipe for creating disagreement and acrimony. For example, who decides whether a decision can wait until the next meeting?

I thought it might be useful to link to the previous thread on the same topic.

As you note, Bylaws can be suspended if they are in the nature of Rules of Order. That is, rules that pertain to the orderly conduct of business within the context of a meeting. In my opinion, the rule that each office requires a separate ballot is in the nature of a Rule of Order and can be suspended.

And, to make it exceedingly clear, allowing members who are not members of the board to make comments during debate is allowing them to participate in debate.

The answer depends on the exact nature of this Special Council, which is not something we can answer for you. For example, what is the council's mandate and term? How are the members appointed to this Council? If this council is actually what RONR would call a committee, then whoever has the authority to appoint the members of the committee also has the authority to fill vacancies and, if I recall correctly from previous discussions on this forum, the authority to replace members.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.