George Mervosh

Indeed, but you've hung around here long enough to know that boards do all kinds of things they're not allowed to do. Just wanted to be sure their board wasn't one of them.

Usually proposed bylaw amendments are voted on by the membership. Is that not the case with your Association?

A motion to rescind/amend the underlying smoking rules would be out of order if a special rule of order was adopted to prohibit it, but the rule itself is fair game. There's really no good way to stop "it" from rearing it's ugly head, in reality, from what I can see by the rules in RONR.

Then I don't think that helps. She wants the matter to go away for a while, and a motion to rescind or amend the adopted rule is dealt with as any other main motion, and I doubt they want to waste time dealing with it.

If adopted, wouldn't it be subject to a motion to rescind, or amend, afterwards?

1) Incorrect. All members may speak to a nomination, for up to 10 minutes per, but I wouldn't expect them to last very long in reality 2) Incorrect. As noted, no motion is necessary to speak to a nomination but no one is required to speak at all. 2a) Debating nominations can only occur while it is in order to make them, not after they're closed.

Yeah, but does RROL have a Porsche?

No, and an Objection to the Consideration of a Question cannot be raised regarding a motion to rescind or a motion to amend something previously adopted.

If the bylaws require a vote by ballot then a ballot vote must be held. If not, and there is only one nominee for each position up for election they can be declared elected. Trusty RROL, eh? What does that stand for?

Agreeing with Mr. Huynh's answer, the original maker has absolutely nothing to do with this situation except for the fact he wants to move to amend it now. Any member may move to amend something previously adopted.

I'm signed up for notifications on threads I post in and I've never received one, unless someone quotes me. I know the Boss Lady knows about it but if I recall correctly it just doesn't work and I wouldn't be expecting it to work anytime soon. I don't know about email notifications. Enjoy!

Not outside of a meeting setting. If there is no vice chairman, or no vice chairman present, the Secretary calls the meeting to order and presides over the election of a chairman pro-tem. If he has to leave during a meeting and there is no vice chairman present he can appoint someone to preside subject to the approval of the assembly.

A quorum is required for all meetings. Do your bylaws authorize special (called) meetings?

RONR imposes no such requirement.

See post #2 for a very good idea.....which makes me wonder why we are on post #11?

I really couldn't care less what they do now. What should have been done by the outgoing board at their final meeting and what they didn't do, is what's causing concern to our OP. I'm sure EAult's board will follow the proper procedure on their way out of the door. (RONR, pp. 474-475)

Yes, at a meeting.

When there is going to be a change in membership like that, the prior members, at their final meeting, should have appointed a committee of a few members to approve the minutes of that meeting. They didn't, obviously, but your new crew can appoint a commitee to actually approve them and bring your board back a set of approved minutes.

And for the last day I thought Messrs. Elsman, Mountcastle and Wynn came back to join us.

Then why does RONR say the President can sign if the assembly wishes if it's dishonest of him to do so and/or he didn't author the document, and Secretaries sign all kinds of official documents they didn't author. I don't even know where to go with the rest of the post.

"Minutes should be signed by the secretary and can also be signed, if the assembly wishes,, by the president." RONR (11th ed.), p. 471, ll. 30-32

I haven't either. While making a nomination is classified a motion (tinted page 18, motion 49), it is, in effect a proposal to fill a blank. Even if you believe it can be withdrawn under the rules on p. 295ff you're not going to get a chance to unilaterally withdraw it. {Member} "I nominate Richard Brown" {Chair} "Richard Brown has been nominated"........right there ends your chance to unilaterally withdraw it since it has been stated. There's just no time. So I respectfully disagree with Mr. Hunt's timeline, unless someone cares to elaborate on why his timeline is correct.

In the order you asked: 1) Correct 2) At any new session, yes. 3) RONR (11th ed.), p. 336ff 4) No, that needed to happen at the meeting where the most failed in almost all cases, and it might not have done you much good.

At least everyone here won't beat this to death the way a certain friend of ours harassed the 10th Edition A-Team, even 10 years after it's publication: "the adorable misspelling of "millennium" on p. VI, and the indelicate typo on p. 630, line 33."

I'm not challenging your answer but I find it interesting and have a question. So the circumstances help dictate whether or not power has been fully divested? Would your answer differ if there was a different set of facts that caused the vacancy to remain, perhaps a scenario where no candidate to fill the vacancy to date could garner "a majority vote of all members of the Board of Directors"?