Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

PBix

Members
  • Content Count

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. An organization holds a special meeting at which it considers a motion to hire someone. Under the organization's bylaws, a 2/3 vote is required for a hire of this kind. The proposed hire receives a majority vote, but not a 2/3 majority, so the motion to hire fails. Some members are interested in reconsidering the motion at the organization's next regular meeting, which is one week after the special meeting. The organization holds regular monthly meetings that go through an agenda in a single afternoon. Are the following statements correct? 1. Each meeting of the organization is
  2. Thank you for these helpful answers, which bring out a nuance of the motion to postpone indefinitely that I had not appreciated.
  3. RONR observes that the motion to "table" something is often misunderstood. RONR helpfully points out that if what is really desired is to kill a measure without voting on it, the correct motion is to "postpone indefinitely," and if what is desired is to kill a motion without voting on it and without further debate, the correct procedure is first to move to postpone the motion indefinitely and then to move the previous question on that motion (of course a 2/3 vote would be required). A member who wants to postpone consideration of a motion could also move to postpone it to a certain time, or
  4. Thank you for this reply; it is helpful even though it is not what I was hoping for. Any other ideas? I'm pretty sure the only person in the organization who truly cares about whether going forward is parliamentarily proper is me. If I give the go-ahead on this, no one will object. In fact, I suspect the rest of the membership is rolling its eyes at my insistence on finding some proper way to do this. So any other thoughts are welcome.
  5. Yesterday, I asked for help with a problem facing my organization. We have adopted RONR as our parliamentary authority and our by-laws have no provision for electronic meetings. We have been meeting over Zoom anyway, with the understanding that we will ratify actions at a later meeting. But now we want to make someone a real job offer, for which the person will have to turn down other offers and relocate, and it may not be good enough for the person if we tell them that the we intend to, by cannot absolutely promise that we will, ratify the offer later. Two suggestions I received were:
  6. Thank you. The hire would require a vote of the membership, and a majority of the membership would have to show up to constitute a quorum either to make the job offer or to change the by-laws. It would be a pain, but they might be willing to do it to get the organization out of the jam it's been in for almost a year now.
  7. Thank you for those suggestions. The outdoor meeting idea might be practical, if we can get a quorum to show up. I will also research the state code.
  8. I am the Parliamentarian of our organization. Our by-laws adopt Robert's Rules as our parliamentary authority. Our by-laws make no provision for electronic meetings. Because of the pandemic, ever since last March, we have been meeting electronically over Zoom, with the understanding that we will have to ratify all actions we take when we are next able to hold a real, face-to-face meeting. Now we face a serious situation. We want to offer someone a job, which would require a vote of the organization. We can hold our usual Zoom meeting, vote to offer this person a job, and tell the p
  9. Thank you all for these helpful replies.
  10. At the meetings of my organization, people have long turned to me when parliamentary issues arise, as I am one of the few members who takes an interest in parliamentary procedure and I actually have a copy of Robert's Rules. Recently I was officially named as our organization's Parliamentarian. But I feel that my knowledge is incomplete. It was good enough when people looked to me informally for advice, but now that I am officially the Parliamentarian, I feel a responsibility to know more. Is there an outlet that offers training in parliamentary procedure? Is any such outlet regarded
  11. Thanks for this reply. I afraid it would not be appropriate for me to reveal the particular details of what my organization is considering. All I can say is that several different members of the organization have each proposed an action that would respond to a situation that the organization is facing, and that the agenda for our upcoming meeting lists each of these proposals as a separate agenda item. The actions are all distinct, but any one of them, or any combination of them, might be considered the appropriate response to the situation we are facing. Based on discussions with some
  12. Thank you for these responses. I also found this:
  13. And if the form suggested in the OP would not work but some other form would accomplish the same goal, please indicate what that other form is. E.g., perhaps the member could include in the body of the proposed resolution the phrase "this resolution shall be inoperative unless adopted by vote of at least 3/4 of those members present and voting."
  14. Although an organization usually adopts motions by majority vote, a member proposing a motion on a controversial topic would like the motion to pass only if it has strong support. Is the member free to propose the motion in the form, "Resolved, by vote of at least 3/4 of those members present and voting, that the organization shall do X"? And if the motion is made in that form and then a majority, but less than 3/4, of those present and voting vote in favor of the motion, does the motion fail?
×
×
  • Create New...