George Mervosh

No. Nothing in RONR would prevent them from being elected as long as they are otherwise eligible to hold office under your rules.

Might be time to move on.

Any committee may meet in executive session for any reason under the rules in RONR.

If the council is following the procedure in small boards (RONR 12th ed., 49:21) he need not leave the chair to make a motion. Also, under those, rules motions do not require a second. Since you are a municipal entity you should consult your solicitor to see if there are applicable rules in statute related to your question, as they take precedence over the rules in RONR.

Are you sure he's not just strategizing and planning outside of a meeting setting, rather than actually making binding decisions outside of a board meeting?

See RONR (12th ed.), 49:13, especially the last sentence - "A board cannot appoint an executive committee unless the bylaws so authorize." So who is calling it that?

One person receiving the ballots is fine, but that person must deliver them, unopened, at the meeting of the tellers (election committee) when they will then be opened. See RONR (12th ed.), 45:60-61

A majority vote will be required. "The basic principle of decision in a deliberative assembly is that, to become the act or choice of the body, a proposition must be adopted by a majority vote; that is, direct approval—implying assumption of responsibility for the act—must be registered by more than half of the members present and voting on the particular matter, in a regular or properly called meeting of the body (see also 44:1–2). Modifications of the foregoing principle that impose a requirement of more than a majority vote arise: (a) where required by law; (b) where provided by special rule of a particular organization or assembly as dictated by its own conditions; or (c) where required under the general parliamentary law in the case of certain steps or procedures that impinge on the normal rights of the minority, of absentees, or of some other group within the assembly's membership." RONR (12th ed.) 1:6

Almost 24 hours later and I am still at a loss to see why the point should be well taken. There has been a change in circumstances since May. What do you think, J.J.?

No. See RONR (12th ed.), 46:9-17.

Here is what RONR says: "Rules Relating to the Secrecy of an Executive Session. The general rule is that anything that occurs in executive session may not be divulged to nonmembers (except any entitled to attend). However, action taken, as distinct from that which was said in debate, may be divulged to the extent—and only to the extent—necessary to carry it out. For example, if during executive session a member is expelled or an officer is removed from office, that fact may be disclosed to the extent described in 63:3. If the assembly wishes to further lift the secrecy of action taken in an executive session, it may adopt a motion to do so, which is a motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted (35). In making or debating such a motion, the members must be careful, if the assembly is not in executive session, to preserve the existing secrecy." RONR (12th ed.), 9:26 In my opinion I don't think merely mentioning that discussion occurred in executive session violates any secrecy rules, but the board itself may view this differently.

I don't think this additional explanation changes anything, J.J. Now a Request for Information about the quorum issue seems fine, since it relates to the business at hand - the board report.

With nothing else pending why would it even be proper to raise a point of order? What is the Club considering that would warrant one?

I agree with J.J.. "If the executive board of a society takes action that exceeds the board's instructions or authority, that conflicts with a decision made by the assembly of the society, or that falls under any of the categories listed in 23:6, a point of order can be raised at a board meeting at any time during the continuance of the breach. If the point of order is sustained, the action must be declared null and void." RONR (12th ed.), 23:9 See FAQ#1 https://robertsrules.com/frequently-asked-questions/

The book does not use articles and numbers, it uses sections and paragraph numbers. Even in the fourth edition published in 1915 where it was used, that isn't it. It seems to me that this person is not using any official edition of Robert's Rules.

By a majority vote, nominations can be re-opened prior to the actual election. I think Dr. Kapur would agree that every effort should be make to complete the election at the appointed time.

I don't see that requirement either. Ask the person telling you this to show you where it is at.

If the bylaws require a vote by ballot, there should always be a space for a write-in vote for each position whether there is a nominee for that office or not. If the bylaws don't require a vote by ballot consider making a motion to vote by ballot, which requires a majority vote to adopt, and make sure there is a space for a write-in vote for each position. Your group may find your officer that way.

Nothing you have described suggests that your election is invalid. The rules for contesting an election are found in RONR (12th ed.), 46:48-50. Also, an election may only be contested at a regular or properly called meeting. A text saying the election is invalid means nothing, procedurally.

The latter. In the future, the membership should not be waiting a year to approve minutes. If the membership doesn't want to approve them just before adjourning the annual meeting (that's not always a practical option), they should authorize the board or a special committee to approve them. See RONR (12th ed.), 48:12

" The name of the maker of a main motion should be entered in the minutes, but the name of the seconder should not be entered unless ordered by the assembly." RONR (12th ed.), 48:5 1) "To modify the rules governing what is regularly to be included in the minutes requires adoption of a special rule of order, although a majority vote may direct the inclusion of specific additional information in the minutes of a particular meeting." RONR (12th ed.), 48:3 All of §48 is worth a read.

Not unless the bylaws permit such an assessment. "Members cannot be assessed any additional payment aside from their dues unless it is provided for in the bylaws." RONR (12th ed.), 56:19

Was this matter referred to the committee by the assembly? Or is this just something that arose in the committee on its own?

"Except as authorized in the bylaws, the business of an organization or board can be validly transacted only at a regular or properly called meeting—that is, as defined in 8:2(1), a single official gathering in one room or area—of the assembly of its members at which a quorum is present." RONR (12th ed.), 9:30 So unless some higher rule (like the ones you mentioned) permit it, it cannot be validly done under the rules in RONR.

No. One person, one vote is a fundamental principle of parliamentary law. RONR (12th ed.), 25:9.