Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

KingK

Members
  • Content Count

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Certainly. All the more reason for me to become registered. The email I sent in response to the “email voting” concern was succinct, but included all of the information you mentioned. This isn’t even a matter of (mis)interpretation. I have only offered details that come directly from our local, state-conceived bylaws. A state-level leader has ‘sided’ with our local president as though the methods were at all debatable. Such has been the case month-after-month. Thank you for responding.
  2. Thank you for the suggestion. Your guidance is a tremendous help.
  3. My point(s) exactly. I asked that we wait until our next scheduled meeting to vote May 21. I, also, asked that all members be contacted via email to encourage attendance & a vote. My points have been defeated by the District 1 PTA president of our state, and I am surprised. However, I do not know what our local president’s email stated or asked.
  4. Well, here’s an update: The PTSA President emailed me to say: ”Thank you for sharing your concerns about the electronic voting of the slate. I have spoken with [———], the District 1 PTSA President and have been advised that it is okay to have the board vote electronically on the slate.” - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Thank you all for your responses.
  5. Thank you for clarifying what proxy means. That explanation is very helpful.
  6. It was a general meeting only attended by 13 (of 23) executive board members. Our bylaws state in Article VI: Election, Section 2. “Executive Committee Officers shall be elected by April 30 by the voting body of the association.”
  7. I recognized this response as humor. 😅
  8. Kind Sirs: Weldon, Gary, Atul, Joshua, and Richard: You, gentlemen, are my “speed dial” NAP-pers. I truly appreciate your prompt responses and scholarly support. Thank you kindly. Also— Are any of you available in person to attend the next meeting? *chuckle* Seriously, I am hopeful that this latest attempt at yet another shortcut will be the last one. Thank you, All!
  9. Our bylaws state, “Voting by proxy and/or absentee ballot is prohibited.” And— “ARTICLE XV: AMENDMENTS These PTA bylaws may be amended by a two-thirds (%) vote of the members present and voting, a quorum having been met, at any general membership meeting, provided that these requirements have been complied with” Can the executive board and membership vote on bylaws amendments via email?
  10. You are correct Dr. Brown; I do not know for certain. Update: The meeting minutes do not reflect my motion to postpone. Now, I have to address that, also. Please let me know if I’ve adequately addressed your questions in my 10pm EST response posted above.
  11. All of you would be correct—to a degree (unfortunately). “Guest Who’s” response is most accurate while Dr. Brown and J. Katz have summarized the meeting mayhem quite nicely. Yes, I appealed her “ruling” (more so denial). The subsidiary motion was to postpone the main motion and refer it to a (non-existent) bylaws committee. (It now exists) The issue is both intent AND knowledge (lack thereof) on the president’s part. She admitted, she only created the standing rules document to add new officers: asst. treasurer and co-presidents. 💁🏽‍♀️ Those that came to her defense (I didn’t address her hand in this...only the conflicting documents) do not know parliamentary procedure though one assured me that “it IS in ‘the book’” until I offered her my copy to locate the reference. She then shouted a motion to make the “asst treasurer” the chairperson of a finance committee. (Yes, before the ruling on my Pt of Order or the main motion were ‘handled’) The president (among past presidents defending her) does not know or understand any of this... Therefore—in re: her email—There is no point in addressing her need -to -know outside of a meeting. I read and repeated the rationale from type-written notes with corresponding, colored highlights of the bylaws vs. “standing rules.” I had to explain “lay it on the table” and postponing (as options to move this along) any adoption to our Sept gathering (hardly a meeting) to be addressed as unfinished business. [pardon typos/grammatical errors, i’M gLiTcHiNg)🤖
  12. I explained and quoted the bylaws during the meeting. Other board members asked clarifying questions. I addressed them all, point-by-point. Hours later, I received an email request from the president (cc: entire exec committee), requesting I share (again) with her each conflict. They are numerous. It is clear to me that she does not understand what standing rules are/can be. FYI...her “standing rules” and the bylaws are linked above in my original post.
  13. UPDATE: The executive board met. I raised a Point of Order when the president asked for debate of the motion to adopt the “standing rules” documents. The room erupted. I presented the rationale along with clear evidence, using the bylaws and RONR 11th ed, and the group *still* argued I had no basis. However, my motion tabled the adoption, and I recommended the formation of a bylaws committee to review the suspicious document. Following the meeting, I’ve been asked by the president to explain to her why I “believe” her standing rules conflict with the bylaws. *sigh*
  14. Thank you, Gary. The unanimity was astounding—to me. I raised a Point of Order in the subsequent meeting to “adopt” said rules. I stood alone, figuratively and literally, but I presented the rationale along with clear evidence, using the bylaws and RONR 11th ed, and the group *still* argued I had no basis. However, my motion tabled the adoption, and also, I recommended the formation of a bylaws committee to review the suspicious document. I’ve been asked by the president to explain to her why I “believe” her standing rules conflict with the bylaws. *sigh*
×
×
  • Create New...