Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'adopt'.
Found 3 results
For consistency and explanatory purposes, it seems like at it would be better for the motions to ratify or censure to be explained under the chapter on incendental motions rather than so cursorily at the end of the chapter on the main motion. In the very least, it seems as though the motions to ratify or censure are different enough from the motion to adopt (e.g., recommendations about action to be taken v. not-yet-validated actions perhaps already taken) that the motions should fall under separate subheadings. I raised more specific questions about the motion to ratify in an earlier post. But it also seems like the motions to ratify or censure deserve a more thorough treatment, if not with form and examples then at least with standard descritpive characteristics. I believe the motion to ratify (as opposed to the motion to censure) should not be allowed to be laid on the table such that it could ever fall to the ground. Actions requiring ratification should not go unratified. They should either be ratified or censured. I also believe the synonym to "approve" for the motion to ratify should be omitted. Otherwise the motion to "approve" (i.e., ratify) could become a conflicting term with the practice of approving minutes, which is not done by a motion. Worse, an organization could become mistaken that approving minutes which might include action in need of ratification, say from a previously held special meeting since the last regular meeting, is somehow tantamount to ratifying such actions. Which is bad.
I was under the impression from reading RONR 11ed that dispensing with the minutes means they are not read at the regular time of the agenda but are still read at a later date. However, in RONR for Dummies (which I know some of you are less fond of), it mentions a special wording where one adds "and approve them as distributed" so that the minutes no longer have to be read. From my studying, RONR 11ed makes no mention of that special wording or such motion. Is this still legal and would the standard characteristics be consistent with the normal dispense (e.g. majority vote and no debate)? Should the motion be phrased "dispense with the reading of the previous meeting's minutes" or just "dispense with the reading of the minutes"? Also, does the adoption of such motion assuming it is legal require any special action or statement on behalf of the chair or secretary other than the Secretary noting the adoption of the motion in the current minutes. Thank you!