Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well, first of all I would respond by saying our Bylaws don't address the use of electronic meetings. Bylaws state: "Responsible for recruiting candidates, posting date and location of the election, producing ballots, conducting the election, counting ballots and announcing results."
  2. Yes we have an election committee tasked with finding candidates, also, we live in a senior citizen community and for health concerns all meeting were canceled, which I'm sure you can understand. Our Bylaws place the responsibility of generating ballots with the Election Committee so, in response to Mr. Martin, I guess that eliminates calling a winner by acclamation?
  3. Due to the Corona virus shut-down our organization hasn’t been able to hold any meetings. We have elections coming up but our Election Committee was never able to establish candidates. I’m trying to establish the fairest way to vote with minimum confusion on the various positions assuming that we will be holding a general membership meeting before the end of the year. We have 4 officer positions and 6 board member positions. Step 1: Would be to accept nominations from the floor for officer positions only. Step 2: Any officer who is running unopposed would be declared the winner by acclamation. Because no meetings were permitted, all ballots are blank and must be write-in. Step 3 w/question: Should the votes for those officer positions with 2 or more candidates be on one ballot or should there be a separate vote for each officer position? Step 4: Identify those board members who will be running for another term. Step 5: Accept additional nominations from the floor. Step 6: Simply have member’s write-in the names of the six candidates of their choice. Question: Does this sound like a reasonable method of holding this year’s elections, am I missing something or am I looking for trouble? Please advise.
  4. Understanding all the explanations previous stated and not attempting too beat a dead horse, but one last question; if no one in the assembly called a "second" could the chairman take advantage as his/her right as a member and call the "second" or would that be out of order. I assume to do so he/she would have to relinquish the chair first?
  5. To Mr. Merritt; I apologize if I violated any forum rules but please explain what was/is the infraction caused by using Dr. Kapur's post? I personally apologize to Dr. Kapur as well!
  6. You are of course correct. I incorrectly used the term "dilatory" when I was really eluding to an unverified vote result as being "detrimental."
  7. Roger-That, but it just seems to me that leaving a vote in question because nobody called a "second" is more dilatory than a so-called time-consuming count? But I guess that's just me! 😞 I respect everybody's opinion on this, thanks! It is what it is if you go by the book!
  8. So then, is the method of that verification to actually end-up becoming a counted vote?
  9. Reading thru the new 3rd edition of RONR in Brief; on page 73 "Illustration: Voice, Standing,and Counted Vote." Why was a "second" required when MEMBER C requested a counted vote but no "second" was required for a call for a "Division." Being that a"Vote" is such a fundamental right and important principle within parliamentary procedure, it seems to me that a call to verify the accuracy of a vote should never require a "second." Failure to verify would always leave the results of the vote in doubt and question the integrity of the Chair!.
  10. I kinda thought that that's the response I would receive....my bad...sorry! Can't blame a guy for trying! But it sure would be fun to read their interpretations..
  11. The Articles of Incorporation states: "To do anything and everything lawfully necessary in the interest of the Members of the Corporation, including, without limitation, the following:" Item 5. To purchase, lease, option, contract for or otherwise acquire, take, own, hold, exchange, sell, or otherwise dispose of, pledge, mortgage, hypothecate, encumber any and all classes of property necessary to the fulfillment and furtherance of the objects and purposes of the Corporation within the limits prescribed by law. It also states: "Item 7. The Corporation shall not convey any substantial part of its assets, or any real property of assessed value for tax purposes exceeding $50,000, without affirmative vote of a majority of its membership entitled to vote thereon." Question/ interpretation please: Whereas Item 5 seems to give the corporation unlimited power to buy, sell, contract, etc. pretty much anything. Does Item 7 basically mean that the corporation can't purchase or sell any property if the impact/increase on the corporations taxes exceeds $50,000 without the vote of the membership? Or is it saying the corporation can't sell any portion of its property to get a $50,000 tax reduction?
  12. Suppose at the beginning of the meeting when the chair asks to approve the agenda a motion is made to add New Business but the motion fails. Then just prior to adjourning the meeting, and since you can't make the same motion twice during the same meeting/session a member makes the actual motion that they had intended to raise if New Business was approved. Would this now be allowed because it would instead cause the membership to vote on suspending the rules to allow for the new motion or is basically considered the same failed motion to amend the agenda at the start?
  13. I understand that the agenda can be amended at the beginning or during the meeting but was wondering that since RONR states that "New Business" is part of the "standard" order of business and is the prescribed order of business (pg 353) that it's elimination would require some sort of special rule of order or documentation?
  14. The Boards parliamentary authority is RONR. Question: If the typical monthly meeting agenda for Board Meetings has no "New Business" listed as an item, does that specific agenda format (excluding New Business) have be specified in the Bylaws or other Special Rules of Order? Without specific recorded documentation of this exclusion is this a violation of RONR?
  15. Yes, thank you! It's one of those requirements that you find in other rules (like Rescind) that gives you a couple options if your only considering it in a small Board.
  • Create New...