George Mervosh

No. RONR (12th ed.), 25:9

You didn't even try.

There is no problem. It's just never going to be in order for an election when the election is pending. As Dan noted:

See RONR (12th ed.), 47:36 and 49:17-19.

Yes. RONR (12th ed.), 46:12

See FAQ#1 here https://robertsrules.com/frequently-asked-questions/#faqs

What board?

Any current member of the board may propose a correction to minutes which have already been approved. See RONR (12th ed.), 48:15 for full details.

It's also necessary to know because as Richard noted in post #2 a proposed revision is fully opened to amendment. Individual amendments as we know have restrictions on how they can be amended. Since notice has been given and Mr. Riggins says they want to make some amendments, this could get messy with the notice already provided if this is not a proposed revision. Yes, we just need a lot more information to be helpful here.

Mr. Riggins' use of the word "them" makes me wonder if it s a revision as RONR defines it, or a large set of proposed individual amendments ("them"). Mr. Riggins?

Yes. "The roll is called in alphabetical order except that the presiding officer's name is called last, and only when his vote will affect the result. " RONR (12th ed.), 45:48 If you have the 11th edition, see p. 421. The rule is exactly the same.

In short can a majority vote be passed at a meeting where quorum is met, with a total number of votes that is less than quorum? Yes. As an extreme example, a vote of 1-0 would suffice for a majority vote if a quorum is present. See https://robertsrules.com/frequently-asked-questions/#faqs FAQ#6 for additional information.

It is perfectly proper and RONR (12th ed.) 46:46 covers the procedure involved.

Under the rules in RONR, yes, unless the bylaws or some applicable rule in statute give the board that authority. See RONR (12th ed.), 49:7.

RONR (12th ed.), 49:21

Yes, a vote is required since there is a proposal to amend the document. Edited to add: Forget about trying to decide if something is substantive or administrative. Any change is an amendment.

The executive committee can, by either unanimous consent or a majority vote enter into executive session. However if you are wanting the executive director to be excluded from such a session you might have an issue. See FAQ#2 here https://robertsrules.com/frequently-asked-questions/#faqs , especially the second paragraph of the authorship team's answer. So what exactly do your bylaws say regarding the executive director being an ex-officio member?

Thank you. In my view, the fact that no previous notice of the amendments is needed for the members prior to the conference, part of the rule in 13:01 is one for the benefit of the governance committee to get prepared for the conference. Based on the facts presented I don't see any continuing breach of the rules which would render any adopted amendments in 2019 null and void, in my opinion.

Bear with me for a couple more questions. Okay, so I submit a proposal to the Governance Committee well within the sixty day requirement. What happens next? Does the committee have to get them to membership within a certain number of days before the biennial conference? I ask because if the membership did not receive the required notice obviously that's a problem.

If you posted this already, I apologize, but what do you mean by "and previous notice"? Notice to the association members? I don't see in 13:01 where it says there's a set number of days to be given to the members, only the committee. Is there some other provision you're referring to?

I wonder what they mean by "Except in cases of emergency" Removing a director doesn't seem like one to me but I wonder what the board thinks.

But the bylaws don't seem to be silent at all.

I don't understand why you say they are disqualified. I thought the last sentence in the footnote made it clear they are not disqualified.

I'm not more knowledgeable but I thought Mr. Brown was simply referring to RONR (12th ed.), 46:32 n1.

Yes. RONR notes "all points of order and appeals, whether sustained or lost, together with the reasons given by the chair for his or her ruling " are recorded. RONR (12th ed.), 48:4 (10).