Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

George Mervosh

Members
  • Content Count

    6,398
  • Joined

1 Follower

About George Mervosh

  • Rank
    Professional Registered Parliamentarian

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Pittsburgh PA
  • Interests
    www.smoothermeetings.com

Recent Profile Visitors

3,787 profile views
  1. You might be able to get it in there via the amendment process if a stand alone motion is going to be out of order, but I'm really bad at examples and you haven't provided any facts about what is pending.
  2. I'm not sure I understand all of what you wrote or your desired outcome but see RONR (11th ed.), p. 103, Standard Descriptive Characteristic #2 - "Can be applied to no other motion" So, no, tacking it on as some sort of secondary motion is not going to work.
  3. It is always a main motion, yes. "Since the motion to ratify (or to censure) is a main motion, it is debatable and opens the entire question to debate." RONR (11th ed.), p. 125.
  4. Anytime up until the voting actually began nominations could have been opened again by a majority vote, yes. Members could have also written in the person's name without nominating them. I can't tell from your facts if any of the members were already in the process of voting. "When for any reason it is desired to reopen nominations, this can be done by a majority vote. " RONR (11th ed), p. 289
  5. I don't know of any rule that would prohibit it, however, the member on the phone may NOT vote unless your bylaws expressly authorize it.
  6. If that's all it says, I agree with Mr. Martin that the vote was advisory.
  7. Was this a properly called meeting? I still can't tell from the facts, and as we've learned here, ratifying an action taken at a meeting that is not properly called to begin with is not proper.
  8. You might want to review at least the first four paragraphs on p. 481 for more of what RONR does say.
  9. Yes, I've been out of the room counting during a convention, but if I was in the meeting otherwise I'd want the tellers focused solely on correctly counting the votes and preparing their report, so it is a good thing if they count them elsewhere, in my opinion.
  10. First I'm Bob, now I'm Mr. Mahvash. Bob Mahvash? I kind of like it.
  11. There isn't any need for a double approval process and really no need to put this in the bylaws. The membership can simply authorize the board to approve the minutes at each annual meeting. They can still make additional corrections in the future. "When the next regular business session will not be held within a quarterly time interval (see pp. 89–90), and the session does not last longer than one day, or in an organization in which there will be a change or replacement of a portion of the membership, the executive board or a committee appointed for the purpose should be authorized to approve the minutes. The fact that the minutes are not then read for approval at the next meeting does not prevent a member from having a relevant excerpt read for information; nor does it prevent the assembly in such a case from making additional corrections, treating the minutes as having been previously approved (see third paragraph below). " RONR (11th ed.), pp. 474-475 "If the existence of an error or material omission in the minutes becomes reasonably established after their approval—even many years later—the minutes can then be corrected by means of the motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted (35), which requires a two-thirds vote, or a majority vote with notice, or the vote of a majority of the entire membership, or unanimous consent." RONR (11th ed.), p. 475
  12. Why would there be a vote prior to going through your three reading process? Or did that take place already?
  13. Aside from the simple fact that the purpose of a motion to lay on the table is entirely different from a motion to postpone, the postponed matter will automatically come up under the heading of general orders at the next meeting unless it is made a special order. At that time it can be postponed again to the next session (assuming it is within a quarterly time interval). No need to even debate or make progress on it.
  14. "The privileged motion to Adjourn: 1. Takes precedence over all motions except the privileged motion to Fix the Time to Which to Adjourn; but it is not in order while the assembly is engaged in voting or verifying a vote, or before the result of a vote has been announced by the chair, except that, in the case of a vote taken by ballot, a motion to Adjourn is in order after the ballots have been collected by the tellers and before the result has been announced" RONR (11th ed.), p. 235 (and see the footnote)
  15. What we can't tell you is if your rule is intended to be some sort of requirement of previous notice.. I suspect not but we don't get to decide that, as Mr. Elsman and Mr. Harrison have noted.
×
×
  • Create New...