Tomm

Not understanding where the 600% came from? Do you perhaps mean 60%?

They most definitely say "generally" See above#

That's exactly what the bylaws say: "Meetings of the Board shall be held on the days and times as designated by the Board. The President, Vice-President or his/her appointee shall preside at all meetings. Six (6) Board of Directors shall constitute a quorum. Robert’s Rules of Order shall govern procedure at all meetings of the Corporation provided they are consistent with the laws of the State of Arizona and the Corporate Documents. A Parliamentarian may be present at Board meetings at the discretion of the President...Board meetings will generally be held on the second Monday and last Thursday of the month at 9am in the Sundial Auditorium, except the months of July and August when no Board meetings are held. Board meetings may occur earlier in the month during November and December due to the holidays." Some board members want, on a 3 month trial bases, to replace one board meeting a month with an informal meeting with the general Membership to hear their suggestions or complaints. There's an argument among the board members. Some want to actually amend the Bylaws and others just want to try it on trial basis first. Is there a motion that can be made to accommodate the later?

If the bylaws state that the board will generally meet twice a month, is this a rule that can be suspended so that the board could instead only meet once a month for perhaps the next three month time span? Is this considered a Rule of Order that can be suspended with a 2/3rd's or majority of the entire membership vote?

t48, VI. Motions which require a two-thirds vote with the caveat a majority of the entire membership is also acceptable. One item states that the motion to "Amend or Rescind Something Previously Adopted (general case, including ordinary standing rules), when previous notice has not been given." Two Questions: 1. If the bylaws don't specifically specify that it requires a 2/3'rds vote to amend the bylaws then would either 2/3rd's or a vote of the majority membership apply? (if the bylaws fail to specify any requirement I suppose even a majority vote might work?) 2. Even if the bylaws stated a 2/3rd's vote was required to amend a bylaw, would the majority of the entire membership still allow the amendment to be amended since it normally holds a higher threshold to achieve? (even if you're only talking about a 9 person board meeting)

I was simply asked by a member of the board (I am not a member) how can the agenda be changed if other board members don't agree with it. What's happening is, a motion will be made and it's on the agenda, that at the next board meeting a motion to Reconsider a motion that failed will be made. My armchair quarterbacking informed them that the motion is out of order because it needed to be made at the meeting in which it failed (37:10 (b). This is a meeting, not a session and no other motions apply.

If there is no vote to approve an agenda because the order of business is in accordance to RONR, how and can you change the agenda?

Awesome...thanks!

37:10 b says the motion has to be made on the same day as it was originally presented unless you're talking about a session and the next day! Are you saying that if the motion to reconsider was made the next day of the session then those rules limiting debate don't apply?

This is where you lose me??? So you're saying he can again speak twice for 10 minutes only on the motion to reconsider the original motion but once the original motion is again brought back and debatable, he can't speak during that debate process unless he gets additional permission from the assembly?

Okay, I think I've got it. The member can exhaust his/her right to debate while debating the original "motion" to reconsider but once the motion is brought back he can once again debate the merits of the motion?

Motion to Reconsider 37:21: Regarding the ability to debate after exhausting your right to debate; can you better explain "(But such a member can pursue an equivalent purpose while the motion to Reconsider is pending, since the motion proposed to be reconsidered is also open to discussion in debate on the motion to Reconsider)" I get the point about exhausting your two, ten-minute rule on debate but not quite understanding the additional allowable allotted time?

If at the Annual Membership Meeting where the president of the board is the acting chair and the rest of the board members are also in attendance, how are the board members in attendance to be viewed? Are they still considered as board members or simply part of the general Membership?

I'm sorry but I fail to see the difference? What am I missing?

Is this process clearly articulated somewhere in RONR? I find that VERY interesting!

Am I understanding you correctly that during the General Annual Membership Meeting the Members, with either a 2/3rd's vote of those in attendance, a majority vote with previous notice, or majority vote of the entire membership can request to see the minutes of an Executive Session that was held by the Board, providing of course, the General Membership Meeting goes into Executive Session itself?

When you say "standing rule" are you simply referring to permission being authorized in the motion to establish the committee or are you referring to a Standing Rule as in Special Rules of Order and Standing Rules?

9:35 says the bylaws must authorize electronic meetings to do so. Question: Regarding a Standing Committee; does that mean that electronic meetings must first be allowed for the entire parent organization or can a bylaw state that electronic meetings can only be used by committees? Question: Can a Standing or Ad Hoc Committee be created with the allowable use of electronic meetings while the parent organization or other committees cannot?

How much must the standard order of business change before you need to write a special rule of order for the different order of business? Example: If a typical board meeting always allowed member comments at a certain points. Reading and Approval of MinutesReports of Officers, Boards, and Standing CommitteesReports of Special (Select or Ad Hoc) CommitteesSpecial Orders Member Comments Unfinished Business and General OrdersNew Business Member Comments Question: Would the above additions to the order of business warrant a special new order of business?

Well, the members of the board aren't that savvy in the use of RONR. After much pressure from the general membership they finally decided to form an Ad Hoc committee to review and revise the Bylaws. I believe this should be a standing committee but I'll take what I can get for now. As a non-member of the board, I'm applying for a position on that committee in hopes of improving many issues.

I'm referring to an Ad Hoc committee established by a motion of the board. You're referring of course if the rule was established in a bylaw?

One last question!...Would it be correct that, regarding the establishment of a committee, if you were to specify that the board chair would select the chair of the committee and the chair of the committee would select its members, that should be a special rule of order rather than a bylaw?

This is where my confusion kicks-in! Seems like the only mentions in RONR regarding what a special rule of order is, is if you want to change the rules for debate, specifying which procedures in small boards you use or not use and the allowable use of a consent agenda? I'm sure there are many others but I just can't seem to differentiate what they might be! It would be great if you could provide a few more examples which may help me get by brain around the difference!

Are there pro's and con's as to when or why you should establish a rule in a bylaw or when you should just make it a special rule of order? The vote requirements to suspend either one seem to be the same 2/3rd's?

But the initial meeting must first be a regularly called meeting, a special meeting or an adjourned meeting? It's my understanding there is no such "type" of meeting specified as executive session?