George Mervosh

I think you should, if possible, follow J.J.'s advice. "In the absence of a quorum, any business transacted (except for the procedural actions noted in the next paragraph) is null and void. But if a quorum fails to appear at a regular or properly called meeting, the inability to transact business does not detract from the fact that the society's rules requiring the meeting to be held were complied with and the meeting was convened—even though it had to adjourn immediately. Even in the absence of a quorum, the assembly may fix the time to which to adjourn (22), adjourn (21), recess (20), or take measures to obtain a quorum. Subsidiary and incidental motions, questions of privilege, motions to Raise a Question of Privilege or Call for the Orders of the Day, and other motions may also be considered if they are related to these motions or to the conduct of the meeting while it remains without a quorum." RONR (11th ed.), pp. 347-48

Until this update I was thinking that if that question was on my RP test I would have been kaput.

Yes, there are no restrictions on who may make the motion. There are no restrictions in RONR on rescinding an adopted main motion involving a contract, but there may be consequences in doing so which we cannot opine about here, because we don't do legal here. RONR notes that there are certain things which cannot be rescinded. In your case this seems applicable: "When something has been done, as a result of the vote on the main motion, that is impossible to undo. (The unexecuted part of an order, however, can be rescinded or amended.) " RONR (11th ed.), p. 308 b ) emphasis added by me. From your facts it seems there are unexecuted parts which can be rescinded.

Neutrality is not required in a small assembly such as yours. The President may participate fully. See RONR (11th ed.), pp. 487-488. If it's been a custom for the president to remain neutral that's fine, but it's not a requirement. Any member may move to rescind an adopted main motion. Making such a motion in no way nullifies the adopted main motion in question. If the motion to rescind is adopted, then the original motion is rescinded. Given the fact everyone who voted was in favor of it, it doesn't seem likely the motion to rescind will pass, unless there may be a change in circumstances surrounding it or the President is really persuasive during debate. See RONR (11th ed.), p. 305ff

Josh, a question on your second paragraph. I thought it was mentioned here some time ago that motions adopted at a meeting that is not a regular or properly called meeting cannot be ratified, but "An assembly can ratify only such actions of its officers, committees, delegates, or subordinate bodies as it would have had the right to authorize in advance." (p. 125). Am I making a distinction without a difference, or do I have this all wrong (again)?

If it's possible to properly postpone the annual meeting, the terms of the officers are not extended to that postponed date. Whenever their term was due to normally expire is going to be when their term expires. No extension, nothing. One of the to priorities for your annual meeting should be to think about amending the wording for the term of office for officers. See RONR (11th ed.), pp. 572-575

I think you have a problem: " The length of the terms of office should be prescribed; and unless the terms are to begin at the instant the chair declares each officer elected, the time when they are to begin must be specified. (In either case, the terms of the outgoing officers end when those of the incoming officers begin.) To ensure the continued services of officers in the event, for example, of public emergency or of difficulty in obtaining a nominee for an office, the unqualified wording "for a term of . . . year(s)" should be avoided, because at the end of that time there would be no officers if new ones had not been elected. " RONR (11th ed.), pp. 573-574

He posted that almost 5 years ago, so you'll have to keep waiting.

What's so hard about simply not closing them until debate is completed?

Now I know why I never get picked to be on a tellers committee

RONR contains no qualifications for being a teller.

Yes, unless your group is okay with the VP automatically ascending to the presidency in such cases, and Mr. Martin provided you something to work with in that regard in the second paragraph of his last post.

Qualifications for office are properly found only in the bylaws, and the bylaws would need to amended if that is their goal. Redefining a member in good standing isn't going to cut it.

Re-read Mr. Lages answer.

RONR defines it: "*Members in good standing are those whose rights as members of the assembly are not under suspension as a consequence of disciplinary proceedings or by operation of some specific provision in the bylaws. A member may thus be in good standing even if in arrears in payment of dues (see pp. 406, 571–72). If only some of an individual's rights as a member of the assembly are under suspension (for example, the rights to make motions and speak in debate), other rights of assembly membership may still be exercised (for example, the rights to attend meetings and vote)." RONR (11th ed.), p. 6fn

No that's not clear at all. "In case of the resignation or death of the president, the vice-president (if there is only one) or the first vice-president (if there are more than one) automatically becomes president for the unexpired term, unless the bylaws expressly provide otherwise for filling a vacancy in the office of president." RONR (11th ed.), p. 458 I don't see anywhere in your cited bylaws where it addresses a vacancy in the office of president. As we've learned here throughout the years, "any" doesn't mean any when it comes to the office of president.

The pages cited don't directly address debate, but the process of making nominations is a motion (tinted pages 18-19, motion 49) and I'm certain you are aware that you can't debate a motion in an assembly unless it's actually pending.

I agree with Mr. Elsman. Nominations are debatable but only when it's in order to make them, so don't close nominations until these speeches are concluded.

Our good friend @J. J. wrote an article on shift meetings many years back. I'm not sure as a "Guest" you can send him a message from here, so you might want to sign up for an account, but it's the only thing I've ever read that relates to this. If you message him he might send it to you.

The minutes only need to note that the motion was adopted. No further description is necessary.

Yes. "A recount may also be ordered at a special session properly called for that purpose, if held within a quarterly time interval of the session at which the voting result was announced and before the next regular session. " RONR (11th ed.), p. 419 That's not proper. A motion to rescind applies to adopted main motions and reconsideration is not possible at this point. As Mr. Lages notes, a recount is a viable option if the ballots are secure, and if not, as Mr. Brown notes, the motion can simply be made again. Either action must be done at a regular or properly called meeting.

Under the rules in RONR, business can only be transacted at a regular or properly called meeting. So there is no alternative mechanism found in RONR.

And see pp. 405-406.

That must be in deluxe version of FAQ#5

See this https://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#5 and page 401 in RONR (11th ed.). The simplest way to calculate it is, there must be at least twice as many votes in the affirmative as there are in the negative.