Nicole E

I will keep that in mind, thank you.

I have been observing a situation where I see the chair, who is also the president, brings up an item of business, and then proceeds to speak extensively on that item, and then instead of offering a motion, or opening up the item for discussion, the chair asks the rest of the board if they have any questions, and then once any questions have been put forth and answered (by the chair), the following happens: Chair: "Okay, I need a motion." Another member: "I'll make that motion." Chair: "I need a second" A different member: "Second" Then they proceed with roll call voting. I am asking about this because nearly every item on the Agenda is handled this way, and it seems to me that if someone is the first to speak on an item of business, especially in a nearly exclusive manner, and then proposing something to be voted on, that they themselves should make the motion, and not ask for someone else to make it. Thank you for any help!

Thank you Mr. Martin and Mr. Katz for your replies.

Consider the following situation: A group discusses an item of business, and decides to take an action within, or at the end of the discussion. The chair says: "Does someone want to make a motion?" or "Can we get a motion?" A member says: "I'll make that motion" then chair asks for a second, and someone seconds it, and then they vote, but the motion is never expressed as a statement, and is also not repeated by the chair. On the minutes, the topic is listed, perhaps with a statement that the person doing the minutes constructs about what was voted on, as well as what the result of the vote. Are there any issues with things being done this way? I was concerned whether votes on items of business would still be valid if the motion being voted on was never actually stated during the meeting. Thank you for your time!

Thank you so much!

Hello all, Not sure if my title captures the meaning, but my question is this: If a group has in their ByLaws that Robert's Rules (latest edition) is named as the officially adopted Parliamentary Rules, is the group obligated to follow them? Does Robert's Rules become part of the ByLaws in that case, and would such a refusal be considered an act of Ultra Vires? This article is part of why I ask, as well as seeing such a board in action: https://charitylawyerblog.com/2010/07/14/nonprofit-law-jargon-buster-ultra-vires-acts/