Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Shmuel Gerber

  • Content Count

  • Joined


About Shmuel Gerber

  • Rank
    @ShmuelGerber on Twitter

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Brooklyn, NY

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Presumably the report either would be considered a report from a special committee or it would be received as new business, so the question is then are there any reports from boards and other committees, and are there any special orders or unfinished business? If there is no business in those other categories, then the question would appear moot (unless there is objection to receiving the report at this meeting at all).
  2. Quoted from https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16823802252198695200 : … The Board consists of nine members. The order challenged herein was the result of a vote of three in favor of the determination and three dissenting therefrom, with one member absent and two abstaining. The three who voted for the order consisted of two representatives of the real estate industry and CAB's 852*852 impartial chairman. The three who opposed the order were all tenant representatives. However, pursuant to CAB's rules and practices only two of their votes were counted. Therefore, the order was is
  3. Absent additional language in your Charter or Village code, in my opinion, General Construction Law Section 41 controls, requiring at least three yes votes for your Board of Trustees to take action. I would note that the title of this section is "Quorum and majority", and in New York the courts, the attorney general, and the Committee on Open Government have all promulgated Mr. Brown's interpretation. I am not a lawyer, but I am fairly confident that that is the current state of the law. I'll quote from one opinion (in my next post), because I
  4. Thank you. I've reported the problem to the forum company's tech support.
  5. The biggest problem I can think of with using the word "shall" in the bylaws happens when they say something like "The president shall be a voting member of the society." This is totally ambiguous as to whether membership is being conferred on the president or is a prerequisite for the office.
  6. Okay, I'll try again. If the member could nominate someone else, and if someone else could nominate him, then he can nominate himself.
  7. That is assuming that the president is a member of the group of people who are generally eligible to make nominations for president. (This would normally be the members who are eligible to vote in the election.)
  8. Where are you in the pecking order? 🙂 I don't know what the first 30 or so words of the quoted text (up to the last comma) mean, but I would say that the last part means that the Council, or at least any decision-making, is governed by Robert's Rules of Order. And that means that decisions of the Council must be made at in-person meetings, by the members actually present at those meetings, unless the bylaws expressly provide otherwise.
  9. I don't see these situations as the same at all. The minutes of a meeting are obviously available *only* after the meeting, not during the meeting.
  10. Actually, this question is discussed in RONR (12th ed.) 56:68(8).
  11. In light of what Zev has said, I think the better phrasing by the chair would be "The chair believes it preferable that this question be formally put to a vote of the assembly." The chair should do this only if he or she thinks it is important that the vote be taken or that a debate be had on it. If it is simply a motion that the chair disagrees with even though the assembly understands the motion and no other member disagrees, then the chair is wasting the assembly's time by objecting, because the outcome will not be affected.
  12. Since we're not answering why the rule is what it is, let me quibble on another point. I would think that: (1) Any amendment would have to apply to the motion "to paint the clubhouse yellow" — i.e., the motion to paint the clubhouse, as amended — rather than to the motion to change the color to yellow. (2) Therefore, if the desired effect is to reverse the decision of changing the new color from green to yellow, the proper motion would be to amend the underlying motion by striking out "yellow" and inserting "green" — and not by "rescinding" the motion to change the color. In other wo
  13. I don't understand the two choices you're offering.
  14. But at least the new forum software helpfully notes "10 years later …" 🙂
  15. The mechanics: Unless this is in a committee or small board, A's motion needs to be seconded, or else the chair shouldn't state the question at all. Before the chair states the question, member B could quickly ask if member A is willing to withdraw the amendment so that B can move to Postpone Indefinitely, but A has no obligation to do so. Member B does *not* have the right to move Postpone Indefinitely in preference to an unstated motion to Amend that is not withdrawn and that another member has seconded or does then second.
  • Create New...