Sid Grice

Out of curiosity. If only certain motions required 3 seconds, does that mean that other motions require less than 3 second? If so, how does your organization determine which motions require 3, and which motions does not? The post above mine have already answered your question, but I would like to understand why your organization created such a rule, and what was its intent in doing so.

Thank you.

For clarification purposes; Is the term "in camera" session being substituted for Executive Session? or could it be used as a substitute for Committee of the Whole?

The person, group, or organization which named the person as director would be a good starting point. But, as mentioned, this is not a parliamentary question, so my response is more of a personal suggestion.

The NAPMobile app provides information about NAP, a self study guide, and a vote calculator. Would be nice to include a searchable database of the "In Brief" guide, or maybe even a link to this forum at some time in the future.

It might serve beneficial for you to check your bylaws. There may be requirements related to the secretary position at your meetings.

Keep in mind that I am still in the learning stage, I would think call for the order of the day would have been more appropriate. To move to consider the previous question, when no question is pending, might have been improper. When you postponed the motion to a specific time (after lunch), you made the postponed motion an order of business to be reintroduced. I am sure, or at least hope for, one of the more knowledgeable members to confirm/discredit my reply.

I can offer no better advice than what has already been given. But, I am curious as to how the change was handled. Did it go through the motion process, or did someone simply claim it to be equivalent to the original version?

I do not see where these questions were ever asked, and I hope Banksmom2008 would be willing to answer them. 1. Are the bylaws you are reading today, the same bylaws from 1.5 years ago? In other words, has there been a revision to the bylaws since the "Executive Board" meeting? 2. Does your bylaws permit the terms "Board of Directors" and "Executive Board" to be used interchangeably? 3. Were the 2 committee chair members, not currently listed as members of the board, actual members of the board 1.5 years ago? A lot can change in a 1.5 year time frame. I am just trying to get a complete picture of the situation, in case I should one day face the same situation.

I appreciate all rebuttal from members of this forum. It is through those rebuttals that I am able to gain a more in-depth understanding.

I misunderstood the original post. What I read was that the chair was not wanting to waste time with having to repeatedly assist a member in properly formatting his motions.

I am still learning, and I apologize for overthinking the issue.

Question: How could there be no quorum, if the meeting was never called to order? Wouldn't the determination for lack of quorum be established at the beginning time for the meeting?

Yes, that is the comment I was referring to. Since he is more seasoned that myself, I felt it inappropriate to address him directly. My concern would be that the motion to refer, which is debatable, could lead to a lengthy debate. Then, just before the motion is actually referred, the motion for the previous question could be made, essentially voiding all debate, and time would have been wasted. This may sound like a worse case scenario, but in consideration the potential, I had reservations of using such motion.

Question: Would P.172 ll. 26-35 and P.173 ll.1-2 be useful? When researching for my own answer to this situation, P.172 ll.33-35 looked promising. From what I seem to understand, the mover can make an incomplete motion, the chair could seek assistance from other members to help make it complete before he states the question on the motion. If I am understanding this correctly, P. 39 ll.33-35 and P.40 ll1-2 claims the chair does have a duty to correct the wording of a motion, if needed, but does not state that he must do it alone. I also am curious about the previous suggestion, and wish for better understanding. If a motion to refer were made, and another member moves the Previous Question, would this still stall the progress of the meeting? Disclaimer: I am still studying the rules, so if any of this is inappropriate, please omit.

Excuse my intrusion. I am asking these questions of the original question, for clarification purposes and as a means to better understand the answer(s). Q1. "3 previous monthly meetings cancelled". Would P.474 ll.31-35 , and P.475 ll.1-7 apply here? (quarterly Time Interval) Q2. "12 weeks of executive board meetings minutes". Would P.487 ll.13-24 also apply? (executive board report) I was going to start a new thread, but was concerned that reference to this thread would cause complications. Thank you

Excuse the intrusiveness of my post, but maybe directing that person to this forum may be beneficial to the organization. I have been reading this forum for awhile, and the benefits have been extremely valuable.

Please bear with me, as I am still in the learning phase. Doesn't the entire Robert's Rules manual place a focus on using proper decorum. From what I have read, or more importantly, what I have not, is that each member of an assembly should speak in an affirmative tone. To openly attempt to overrule someone, or something, might place more emphasis on the negative. Instead, keeping with proper decorum, state the positive, and use the voting process to reject (indirectly overruling the previous decision).