Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'breach'.
Found 4 results
As Charter Organization for a Boy Scout Troop our sports club voted 2 years ago to issue 2 key cards to the senior troop leaders so they could access our clubhouse on meeting nights. Recently, with no reference to the previously approved motion, a motion was approved to pull the key cards since the troop leaders since they are not also club members and that a club member must now be present at every meeting. Because the recent motion did not specifically refer to the orginal motion was the motion and subsequent vote a breach and point of order? As I understand it, the original motion is still in effect as if the latest motion and vote never took place. Bob Kaufman email@example.com
This may not be a question that can be answered in this forum, but here goes. At a County Commission meeting a motion was made and approved to pay a company money if they would move into the county and agree to hire XX number of employees within a few years. Time passes and a new County Commission is in place. Is there any obligation for the new Commission to honor the previously approved agreement with out a contract ?
There were two motions made at a meeting last month. Motion 1: Moved that Section B be deleted from the proposed policy: "Children using X must be 14 years of age or under." This motion was defeated. Then the following motion was proposed, and it passed: Motion 2: Moved that Section B be amended to read, "Children using X should be 14 years of age or under." A member is now suggesting that the second motion is null and void, since it effectively counteracts the point of the proposed policy (i.e. keeping big people from using X), and the deletion of that policy was already defeated at that meeting. Is this a breach, and if so, was it necessary to raise a Point of Order at the time?
Our Board of Directors recently took action based on an email vote. There was no "opportunity to mutually debate and decide the matter as a deliberative body" (RONR p. 487, ll. 4-12) According to the Rules the action must later be ratified at a regular or properly called Board meeting. (ibid) Question: Even if the Board's action is ratified, what precludes the Board from knowingly and repeatedly circumventing the rule in the future when this remedy is readily available, thus hampering any real debate on a continuing basis?