Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

JTW

Members
  • Posts

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

JTW's Achievements

  1. Thank you for that very detailed explanation, Josh. Thank you to everyone. I welcome more input....
  2. Thank you. Because it was very confusing. But after reading section 41:32, is the attorney's suggestion allowed?
  3. This is how it has always been done in the past. So this action occuring at the latest meeting all of a sudden is really puzzling and confusing.
  4. Debate did occur. But it was so strange operating the meeting this way even though I did my best. I objected and stated that I had never seen this in RONR during our closed meeting portion of the school board meeting. But there is so much going on always, that I didn't even bother to object publicly on this issue.
  5. There are four resolutions on an agenda. Normally, board members can remove resolutions from the consent agenda for separate vote and discussion. The board attorney has just told the board that to save time, the board can approve the consent agenda containing all resolutions, then when voting, simply state which resolutions each member is voting Yes, No, or Abstaining from. Example: After a motion has been approved for the consent agenda of four Resolutions, and after discussion, the roll call vote commenced like this: Board Member 1: "I vote Yes on Resolutions One, Two and Three and Abstain from Resolution Four". Board Member 2: "I vote Yes to all items." Board Member 3: I vote No to Resolution One and vote Yes for Resolutions Two, Three and Four." Forum Question 1: Is this allowed? Forum Question 2: If so, where in RONR does it state that this is allowed? Forum Question 3: If not allowed, can Board Rules be changed to allow this type of voting? Note: I've never heard of this before. I would appreciate some opinions or clarity. Thank you.
  6. Thanks. I am still trying to figure out how to handle all of them. I appreciate the responses from everyone.
  7. No...no explanation whatsoever. I have: 1) Told the Board Secretary that he reports to the Board and does not have any authority to jump in and try to overrule any of my Points of Order, and 2) Told the Board Attorney that she serves in an advisory role and unless this is a legal issue, she cannot attempt to override my Points of Order either.
  8. That is where the Board Secretary and Attorney have jumped in twice to declare that I cannot raise a Point of Order while a motion is on the table or when the vote to Adjourn has occurred .
  9. Yes Richard. I browsed RONR last night to try and find some solution to this President preventing others from speaking during the meetings. Even when some members have the floor, the President cuts them off and tries to stop them from speaking. But these actions are most out-of hand during the "Good of the Order" section. (Last two meetings in a row) Pres.: We will now move on to the Good of the Order. Member: Mr. President, I would to make comments first. Pres: No, you cannot have the floor because I will make comments for the whole board. Member: Point of Order. I was not asked if I agreed to this. I will make my own comments. Pres.: No you will not. Only I am making comments tonight. Member: Point of Order. Again, there was no discussion of this prior to, or at any time during this meeting. I will make my own comments. Pres.: I am making comments now. (Proceeds to make comments) (After Pres. comments) Member: Point of Order. I am allowed to make my own comments and I would like to do so now. Pres.: I am making a Motion to Adjourn. Is there a Second. Member: Point of Order Vice President: Second. Pres.: All in favor Some members: Yes Pres.: Meeting Adjourned. Good night. This is my dilemma. Other than a regularly scheduled Superintendent presentation, tha actual meeting portion lasts for only about 30 minutes. So there is no issue concerning a lengthy meeting or running past a predetermined time. I cannot also seem to find enough votes for censure or removal of the President from presiding over any particular meeting if this occurs again.
  10. I'm sorry for addressing this again, but it is still makes me uneasy that my school board president can preside over a meeting, but can make motions at will without ever having to ask anyone to be given the floor. The president is also now making motions to adjourn...specifically to preempt board members from speaking during our "Good of the Order" section of the meeting on our approved agenda. The president states that they will make comments for all board members and not allow other board members to speak. This "Good of the Order" section exists in our bylaws. But since a majority of board members don't challenge the President, the minority of Board Members who have always spoken freely during this section are not allowed to speak anymore. "Point of Order" questions are ignored. The Board President opens the "Good of the Order" section of the meeting. Then the President offers their comments, but immediately after their comment, does not close the "Good of the Order" section and swiftly makes a motion to adjourn with the intent of not letting anyone else speak, without the majority challenging what just happened. The board attorney does not entertain questions of an improper motion that seemingly ignores the intent of that section to allow all board members the chance to speak within our bylaws. I'm baffled.
  11. All of the circumstances that you mentioned are indeed the norm at the elected school board which I serve. But the current School Board President insists that they make motions when that is not how our school board has conducted its meetings in the past. But as you and others have informed me, it is allowable in RONR for a President to make motions. And the motions are seconded, so since it is allowed, there seems to be nothing else for me to address here about that situation. Thank you very much for the reply, Gary.
×
×
  • Create New...