George Mervosh

It is possible to adopt a motion without debate or amendment, yes. "When the object is to adopt a motion without debate or amendment, the form is: MEMBER A (obtaining the floor): I move to suspend the rules and adopt [or "agree to"] the following resolution: "Resolved, That ..." (Second.) If such a motion does not receive the required two-thirds vote, the main motion can be taken up only in the normal way." RONR (11th ed.), pp. 266-267

This calls for a couple of Beefeaters, neat.

So your official title is no longer "Fisherman"?

The parliamentarian should never be the one announcing if a motion was adopted or defeated. That's the presiding officer's job. Was she unaware of the fact that it took a 2/3 vote to adopt the motion?

After thinking about this for a while, I'm not sure it would be in order at all to strike the tellers report from the minutes when the bylaws require a vote by ballot.

I would guess that he viewed it as a suspension of the rules, which is interesting. I think it absolutely should take more than a majority vote to remove a tellers report from minutes which are pending approval.

When the minutes are pending approval and a member proposes a correction, it will take a majority vote to decide the matter if anyone objects to the correction. That said, a teller's report should never be stricken from the minutes as it's an essential element of a vote taken by ballot.

See if this helps some. http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#6

Are the results going to be announced at the next meeting?

Well, post #2 isn't very helpful since he apparently is a member, but yeah

Well if he's an ex-officio member as FAQ#2 notes (thanks Mr. Huynh) he has every right to be there.....but not to take over the meeting. If he's behaving improperly then the Chair should call him to order and the committee should report his actions back to the town's council.

if the town moderator is not a member of the committee (ex-officio or otherwise), they have no rights at all with reference to the committee's proceedings and can be excluded from attending if the committee so chooses. "During actual deliberations of the committee, only committee members have the right to be present. " RONR (11th ed.), p. 501 I'm not sure I understand exactly what the problem is, but if they aren't a committee member, the solution is clear enough.

Under the rules in RONR, if the next meeting is a new session of the assembly, yes. You should check with the Council's solicitor to see if there is any rule in statute regarding the matter since it will take precedence if there is any conflict with the rule in RONR.

Yes, unless it's agreed to by unanimous consent, which is only used for routine, non-controversial motions. A resolution is just a motion, often offered in written form.

Well the 2FP Happy Hour hasn't started yet (but soon), so he's really not preoccupied right now.

I think Mr. Brown was suggesting they postpone the motion to adopt the budget until their next meeting, assuming it's held within a quarterly time interval. But if it's just a postponement until later in the same meeting, of course no adjourned meeting is necessary.

Will they need to set up an adjourned meeting before postponing the matter since their bylaw says it's to be approved at the September meeting?

He can't ask questions about a particular decision while the approval of the minutes is pending, or ask that a particular passage in them not be approved because he has a question about the decision itself. The minutes reflect what was done and you can't rewrite history to change it . In a small board (not more than about a dozen members present) he can discuss the matter and ask questions when nothing else is pending.

Typically, yes. "When previous notice has been given, it is usual to wait for the member who gave notice of these motions to move them; but if he does not, any member can do so. " RONR (11th ed.), p. 307

I remember back in the days of typewriters in college when one could make beer money typing papers.......not me, of course....well.......

"The presiding officer of an assembly ordinarily is called the chairman* when no special title has been assigned, or in a body not permanently organized, such as a mass meeting (53). In organized societies the presiding officer's title is usually prescribed by the bylaws, that of president being most common." RONR (11th ed.), p. 448

I don't see a conflict. Just two sets of facts, generating two different replies (by Messrs. Lages and Martin). Which is exactly why our moderator Mr. Gerber recommends starting a new thread (like you did) instead of adding onto an old one.

I'm more confused. I can't find that response anywhere. Just read Mr.Martin's reply.......life is simpler that way.

Yes. Once the motion had passed, you could have used the motions to Reconsider (RONR, p. 315ff) or, if no one on the prevailing side wished to make the motion you could have used a motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted (RONR, p. 305ff) which could be made by anyone. If someone would have thought of it while the original motion was pending, the subsidiary motion to Amend could have been used. (RONR, p. 130ff)

Yer pushin' it, Tesser!