Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Quest

Members
  • Posts

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

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

Quest's Achievements

  1. Thanks for all comments. My question was answered. The full name is not required. But it is good practice to assure the one who made the motion is clear. I reviewed some of our county commission minutes and they use title and last name.
  2. Sounds like recommended, but is it required?
  3. Our secretary records a roll call of attendees, full names, at the start of the minutes. When motions are made he only references the first name which corresponds with the confirmed attendee. So Jane Doe is recorded present, and Jane made a motion is in the body. A member has stated our minutes are not in legal compliance because the full name is not stated in responses. I am not asking about the legal pov, just what Robert's Rules requires. Thank you
  4. This may need a new thread. Just let me know. Howu is noncontested consensus recorded in minutes? Or should it simply be presumed?
  5. Our chair did not take a vote to enter executive session. He just stated we are now going into executive session. Did concensus + no challenge equal a vote?
  6. Thank you! As one who wants to know the why, not just the rule.... WHY does Robert's Rules lean that finality? What is the logic and reasoning behind it?
  7. That was what I was looking for for future possibilities. One last thing...CAN such an error also be caught in the minutes later and challenged since we do roll call votes and document them in the minutes? Or are you saying the only time it can be corrected is in that meeting with a point of order?
  8. Good information. We do Roll call votes on every issue. Still a little fuzzy on a technicality. Did the actual vote drive the fact the motion carried or the president declaring it to be so? Again 'What if' the vote a vote is affirmative and the president states the motion failed. If only what he states is documented the true vote count is lost. I guess I am asking can a president literally call a motion conclusion incorrectly yet his calling it makes it final?
  9. Facts of what took place or facts of the conclusion of the matter? The vote was 1 nay, 2 abstains and 3 yeas. Are you suggesting that IS a tie? I am not clear what you are asking. I am open to any observations.
  10. I have a what if question. Here is the background that caused me to wonder. In a recent board vote the tally was 1 Nay 2 Abstains and 3 Yeas. Someone said out loud that was a tie. Another stated president breaks a tie and he said I vote yes then. Now it was clearly established finally that abstains are non votes and that it was in fact not a tie and the president announced the count true count and that the motion carried. The minutes reflect the actual count and the motion carried. We will address this matter with our new board regarding breaking a tie because our bylaws are silent and clearly understanding what abstain means. However! WHAT IF the president had ended up announcing the motion status wrong? Does what he SAY finalize the matter or what is documented by vote? When the gavel goes down and the matter announced as passing by a flawed interpretation of abstain?
  11. Thank you all. This has been very helpful
  12. Thank you...so the president's action could be viewed as a response to a point of order....and so could the VP? What a mess...
  13. Posting for clarification here. So the president can ask about further business and then adjourn but can they adjourn because a meeting and it's members are out of order? We had a very contentious meeting recently and the President stated this meeting is adjourned and left the meeting. There was other business on the agenda. The VP stated he had no such authority and took over the meeting after the president stated it was adjourned and left. So this question has a part A and a part B...Part B is dependent on part A. If the president had the authority to end the meeting due to the circumstances the it is a given the VP did NOT have the authority to take the chair and continue...Our Bylaws state the role of the VP if to perform such duties as the President assigns. Thank you
  14. Thank you..at a brief reading at this point this member handing out a list of accusations to the board should not be allowed....Am I correct in that at least in theory?
×
×
  • Create New...