George Mervosh

See RONR (12th ed.), 41:63

"An officer-elect takes possession of his office immediately upon his election's becoming final, unless the bylaws or other rules specify a later time (see 56:27)." RONR (12th ed.), 46:47 Therefore, the newly elected president would preside over the remainder of the meeting unless the bylaws say he takes office at a later time (such as the end of the meeting, etc..).

For regular meetings, I agree. This is a special meeting, however, and they would not be following the standard order of business.

No. What RONR notes is "The only business that can be transacted at a special meeting is that which has been specified in the call of the meeting. " RONR (12th ed.) 9:15

There is no tiebreaker or a need for one. A tie vote defeats the motion that was voted on. The chair may never vote twice.

If the term of the current chair has ended then an election must be held to fill the position. There is no automatic ascension of the vice chair to chair in such a case.

See if FAQ#14 helps and note the last paragraph of it. https://robertsrules.com/frequently-asked-questions/#faqs

That's correct.

No that's not correct.

I think he's referring to an actual motion form for use in a meeting, like the one provided on the RONR CD/Thumb Drive, but perhaps Guest Paul can clarify.

You can elect one at each meeting, yes, but you can't vote on electing one by email unless your bylaws or applicable law provides for it.

Well now, welcome back!

Correct. The motion took effect when the chair declared it adopted.

I know this doesn't directly answer your questions, but your membership is suffering from self inflicted wounds by insisting that what was said by the members be included in the minutes. " In an ordinary society, the minutes should contain mainly a record of what was done at the meeting, not what was said by the members. The minutes should never reflect the secretary's opinion, favorable or otherwise, on anything said or done." RONR (12th ed.), 48:2 When the minutes contain what RONR says they should contain in §48, I'd be willing to bet these questions rarely arise. Others will chime in on the rest.

Wasn't this asked here? > https://robertsrules.forumflash.com/topic/38534-candidates-rights/

Yes. RONR (12th ed.), 48:4 (6).

Yes. RONR (12th ed.), 48:4 (10)

Not. Perhaps a good practical solution is to be sure all of the voting members are seated in one area of the hall during the election and that they are the only ones receiving a ballot.

I agree with Mr. Katz. As a practical matter, if the panel isn't voting by ballot they might want to try it. People may change their minds when the vote is secret.

You should take the advice of the town attorney. 1) As to what RONR says - See if FAQ#9 helps you https://robertsrules.com/frequently-asked-questions/#faqs 2) Nothing in RONR would permit them to do this.

Nothing in RONR would prohibit the group from holding some or all of its meeting in executive session. Yes, a majority vote is all that is needed to enter into executive session.

Nothing in RONR prohibits either of those things. Qualifications for holding office should be in the bylaws.

What if the chair simply says: "The chair's rulings in these cases were based on the advice of the parliamentarian." ?

A parliamentary inquiry must related to the business at hand. RONR (12th ed.), 33:3

48:12 is what I was referring to in my recommendation.