Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Motion'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • RONR Message Board – Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised
    • General Discussion
    • Advanced Discussion
    • The Robert’s Rules Website
  • About the Message Board
    • Questions or Comments about the Message Board

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Location:


Interests

Found 132 results

  1. I am posting in here because we need major help with the way our meetings are run. I believe that nothing voted on in this meeting was valid, and then there's the whole other issue of administration chiming in when they should not have. The issues begin toward the end of the video. Please give your opinions
  2. Once an agenda is accepted and there is an item on the accepted agenda with no motion or resolution, our council takes it as a discussion item. We regularly have accepted agenda items for discussion without motions to discuss, but when one council member does not like the topic, he selectively shuts it down with "Point of order, no motion to discuss". Is this fair procedure? If not, what can I do to stop him from censoring?
  3. Our group has voted to approve an action without thinking it through. No action has been taken yet. The person making the motion wants to rescind it. My opinion is that a recision can be done on any motion or order where irretrievable actions or decision have not been taken. I use Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised 11th Edition. Where can I find information supporting my opinion? Thank you very much.
  4. Our county held a first and second reading for a rezoning request in January. At the second reading there was a motion and second to rezone the property, and the vote was 3 in favor, 4 against. Our county has a 12 month moratorium on requesting a rezone the same parcel, and the type of zoning (PDD) will not exist after the 12 month moratorium, so we assumed the property would not be rezoned PDD. Now our county has an interest in rezoning the property before the 12 months is complete (developer donating some land), and the county decided to bring back the rezoning request by rescinding the vote that was made at second reading in January. From everything I can see in Robert's rules it looks like the motion to rescind is designated for motions that were approved. There is one section of Robert's rules (newly revised 11th) states that the motion to Rescind or to Amend Something Previously Adopted can be applied only to a motion on which the vote was affirmative. I asked our county attorney about this and I received the following response. **************** "Your error with the language on page 78 of Robert's is your interpretation of the word "affirmative". Affirmative should not be read to mean "passed favorably" in the context of that sentence. "Affirmative" should be read to mean "passed by a majority of the body". Whether the majority favorably passed the motion or denied the motion, the vote was by the majority." *************** End quote he then references page 305 where it talks about using this meaning of affirmative when reading sentences which state that motions to rescind apply to adopted motions. As far as I can tell, an adopted motion is a motion where there are enough positive votes for the needed majority. Are they out of order by rescinding a failed vote on a motion? The county attorney has a law degree and I don't, but it seems like you wouldn't need to rescind motions which failed usually because you should be able to just place them on the agenda again at a later date. Thanks,
  5. We have an upcoming called meeting where the primary motion to be considered is of such a nature that some would like it to require a 2/3 majority of those present to pass. I'd like to know what procedures in RONR such a preliminary motion would fall under. Would this be a suspension of rules? This seems an application of suspension. The other potentially applicable procedure would be amending by-laws but that will be out of order due to notice requirements. Thanks in advance
  6. If someone makes a motion (and it is seconded) and then discussion takes place and that person then removes their motion, do we still document that in minutes? If so, do we document the conversation that led that person to remove their motion then?
  7. Guest

    EXECUTIVE SESSIONS

    What is the proper procedure to come back from an Executive Session and go back into an open session meeting?
  8. Our Council considered the appointment of an individual to a community board last evening. There were three nominees of which the votes cast were: Nominee 1 - 4 votes; Nominee 2 - 3 votes; and Nominee 3 - 1 vote. The Council membership is 9 members of which one member was absent. My question is: Would the nominee who received four votes be the appointed to the community board? There are some questions as to whether the individual was required to receive a majority of the votes cast by the attending/present members (i.e., 5 votes). (Total Council members present and voting: 8) We follow the provisions of Robert Rules of Order and our Home Rule Charter provides that "A motion must receive the approval of a majority of those present and voting for passage. I could not find any discussion which relates to our scenario and would appreciate any comments regarding this matter."
  9. An agenda item was completely omitted from approved minutes two months ago. This item included a motion which was moved, seconded, and carried. The recording secretary has written notes from the meeting with the details of the motion, and names of the mover and seconder. What is the best practice to record this? Can we simply ask that the current meeting minutes reflect the discussion from meeting #xxx, and the previous resulting motion be recorded. Should the approved minutes of the previous meeting be amended? Or a new discussion and motion take place at the current meeting? Thank you.
  10. I would like to make a motion at our association meeting that will also create a long term procedure. How should I word this. "I would like our association to buy serialized ballot box padlock seals. http://www.electionsource.com/security-seals/padlock-seal.html Also I would like to make a rule that at the general membership meeting before the ballot boxes are distributed to the facilities and units, the ballot boxes are inspected, witnessed to be empty and locked with the padlock seal. The serial number to the padlock seal will be recorded as to locking the ballot box. The serial numbers assigned to the ballot box will be published and copies will be email to the membership and placed on the association bulletin boards once the ballot boxes are padlock sealed. The padlock sealed ballot boxes will be delivered to the facilities and units by the assigned shop steward. On the last day of the election the shop stewards will delivery the ballot box to the general membership. The padlock seal will be cut and unlocked while being witnessed at the general membership meeting to tabulate the votes. If there is not an assigned shop steward, the board of directors will appoint a member or members via raise of hand vote to deliver and pick up the ballot box. The appointed member will receive release to time to accomplish this task." I would like this process to be a procedure until we vote to change it.
  11. Guest

    Issues at hand

    Our private organization's constitution contains the following clause entitled "Conducting Business Meetings": Any member may attend any meeting of the boards, committees and societies and speak to issues at hand if not restricted by this Constitution; though, for good order, the chairman has the right to place restrictions and policies on meeting guests. The chairmen of some boards have put guest policies in place where guests are entitled to speak to the business items on the pre-published agenda at the start of the meeting, then proceed with the board meeting in a closed session consisting only of the elected board members who are entitled to vote. These chairmen have therefore defined "issues at-hand" to mean the business motions that were on the pre-published agenda, which is always adopted as the agenda for the meeting. They believe the spirit of the constitution clause is satisfied by giving general members time to speak ahead of the formal board member debate. However, a dispute has arisen with a member who has interpreted the term "issues at hand" to mean the items under discussion at the time they are opened for debate among the board members, therefore allowing them the right to attend the closed session and be given the chance to participate in the debate. They define "at hand" to mean the real-time debate by the board voting members. Under this interpretation, there would be no closed sessions. It appears that resolution of this concern requires agreement on the term "issues at hand". This does not appear to be a formal term in RONR, and I am interested in opinions from the forum on this debate.
  12. Is the public hearing opened before or after a motion is made and seconded?
  13. Does a recommendation from a committee need a motion before the Board votes?
  14. A vote was called and ruled upon based with a majority vote. Now a member of the majority has resigned. Can the replacement member make a motion (maybe under new businesses) to revoke the past vote? Or does it need to be a sitting member of the majority from the existing vote.
  15. Failed Motion At a Board meeting, a member of the Board made the following motion to create a “policy of the Board”: “All proposed bylaw amendments must be submitted to the Board of Trustees by the Bylaws Committee for the discussion, refinement and approval before being presented to the membership”. This motion failed with 2 ayes, 3 nays and 2 abstaining. My understanding is, as this motion failed, it cannot be brought before the Board again unless “reconsidered” by one member of the prevailing side. In addition, since the motion failed, there would be no basis to “rescind” since there was no action adopted due to the failed motion. Is my understanding accurate? Could this motion be brought to the membership at a general membership meeting even though it failed in a meeting of the Board?
  16. I understand that the exact wording of a motion should be stated by the chair when putting the question to a vote and when re-stating the question so that it is officially pending. Are there any other instances where the chair must say the exact wording of the motion or can they simply refer to it as the pending motion. For example, if a recess took place while a secondary amendment was pending, when the chair calls the meeting back to order, do they need to say "We will now continue debate on the motion to...." or can they simply say "We will now continue debate on the pending secondary amendment"? I can see the first wording getting extremely wordy and confusion if the chair had to constantly state all the pending motions verbatim whenever an interruption like a recess or question of privilege occurs.
  17. Aloha e kakou, Aloha to all of us! (The Hawaiian language has Inclusive Pronouns.) Anyway, our Home Owners Association recently held its annual owners meeting. The meeting met its quorum threshold, using proxies. The presiding officer was not the usual Board of Directors President but rather a Parliamentarian routinely hired by the management company to conduct these meetings. He read from a prepared script and presided over all business at hand including elections of board directors. The Board President and other directors said nothing during the official part of this meeting, other than to campaign for reelection. At this meeting, the proxy of one owner attempted to move to amend the Bylaws. According to the Association documents, and possibly state law, the Bylaws can only be amended by a majority of the owners, either 67% or 75%. The Parliamentarian refused to accept the motion, claiming, among many things, that the motion had not been introduced before the meeting, that it needed to be first drawn up by an attorney, although the person making the motion is an attorney. Ultimately, the Parliamentarian refused to consider the motion because he could not ensure that the motion would not fail. Excuse me? Questions: Is this how a presiding officer is supposed to behave? I searched the Rules of Order and elsewhere to find out if quelching a motion is appropriate for the presiding officer, without success. Is it appropriate? This Parliamentarian is well known locally, a PRP and a member of the NAP. I have another question about this same meeting, but will start a separate thread to keep this short and not mix topics. Your insight is appreciated. Mahalo nui loa. Thank you very much.
  18. Guest

    Mr

    I attended a meeting last night where a member of the organization attempted to make a motion on a pice of equipment for our department. It's well known that the President is not in favor of the piece of equipment so he would not let the member bring the motion to vote. He said that he will not allow the motion to be discussed. We are a 501c3 organization. Is this allowed? thank you
  19. I am the appointed President of my HOA because there was no quorum met in the Annual meeting which I attended. Therefore, I was appointed as President and not voted in. When we finally did reach a quorum at a future meeting, the membership voted unanimously for 5 Board members to be voted in (myself being one of them). Two things happened: 1) We had no written record (from anyone) of a motion or a second, although we are all pretty sure this happened. 2) 3 of the Board members turned out to be ineligible because they were not in good standing with the HOA So my questions are 1) is the vote still legal even though there was no written record of a motion or a second and 2) are the 2 Board members (myself being one of them) that were voted in that were in good standings still officially on the Board and does it mean the other 3 just aren't allowed on? Thank you!!!
  20. Guest

    Call the question

    After a motion has been made and a second follows, the chair asks for discussion. After discussion has come to an end, and a person is recognized to speak, they announce "I call the question" does the membership have to move, second and vote on "calling the question"? Or do you just procede to the motion that was on the floor and vote?
  21. I am hopefully looking for some help on how to correctly attribute the below in meeting minutes as well as if an attribution is required. Please pardon any incorrect terminology of which I will correct when it becomes known. A motion was proposed by E-mail that read, "I move “That we accept the proposed JE Revised form as presented today from the JE Chair.” ", which was then seconded by E-mail. The motion was then amended by E-mail that read "I move to amend Member A's motion of earlier today to the following: I move that we accept the JE mentor application/agreement as written and distributed (RS please insert time LAST form was distributed). All PCA members currently listed as JE mentors will be automatically accepted as a mentor, however, everyone is required to fill out and sign the new mentor agreement.", which was then seconded. At the next conference call Board Meeting a motion was made to ratify the above-amended motion. My questions are: 1) Given how different the main motion and the amended motion are, whom is this attributed to? The original maker or the member making the amendment? 2) Is this actually a substitution versus an amendment? 3) Do either or both the maker of the Main Motion and/or Amendment need to be noted in the meeting minutes? 4) As the motion to ratify was stated as a generalization rather than restating the above, is it only the ratification statement that is written into the meeting minutes?
  22. At a recent annual, national meeting of an organization, some constitutional amendments had been distributed (in advance, as required) for consideration, but no motion as to their acceptance/adoption had been made. Discussion ensued - despite the lack of a motion. Widespread disagreement and lack of understanding of the not-yet-motioned amendments became apparent. A member motioned that the proposed amendments be referred to a committee for review and rewording, and that the amendments be again considered at the next meeting. This motion carried, and a committee was appointed by the president. The meeting was later adjourned without noticing the potential (likely) parliamentary errors. The entire sequence appears in the minutes -- which are for approval at next year's annual meeting. My Questions: 1. Given the fact that no motion had been made to adopt the amendments, was the discussion of them allowable under RONR? 2. If no motion had been made to adopt the amendments, was the motion to refer them to a committee legitimate under RONR? 3. If these are in fact, as I suspect, parliamentary errors, what can properly be done about them? 4. Can the appointed committee commence work on the amendments?
  23. A meeting is held in which a substantive motion is being contentiously debated and time has run short. A motion to table is made and passed by a 2/3's vote. Putting aside whether this is a poper use of a motion to table (I believe it is not), if a motion is made to "un-table" then does it require a majority vote or a 2/3's vote; does it depend upon the nature of the underlying motion that was tabled?
  24. This is a nationwide non profit dog club. Can a member motion to the BOD be required to include a specific number of additional member's signatures if stated as such in the Bylaws?
  25. Is it more acceptable to say "I move that this organization declare its opposition to the recent increase in dues" over saying “I move that this organization go on record as not favoring the proposal to increase in dues”?
×
×
  • Create New...