Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ratify'.

  • 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
  • Archive
    • Archived Discussions (2010)

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 13 results

  1. I've looked for this topic to be discussed but have not found it, so if I have started this in error, please redirect me. I've found it curious that RONR offers that the motion to substitute "censure" for "ratify" is in order. A motion to censure does not seem germane to the motion to ratify. The motion to ratify has to do with the actions taken by an individual or a group that does not have the power to take such an action as discussed in RONR pp. 124-125. It is the action that requires ratification, or defeat ratification. If the act has already been carried out, I don't see how
  2. I'm concerned that RONR 11 has a potentially dangerous loophole with respect to ratifying action taken at a special meeting. From p. 93: "If, at a special meeting, action is taken relating to business not mentioned in the call, that action, to become valid, must be ratified (see pp. 124-25) by the organization at a regular meeting (or at another special meeting properly called for that purpose)." By stipulating "a" regular meeting rather than "the next regular meeting at the latest" (or at least specifying that ratification should take place at subsequent special meeting called
  3. 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
  4. A parent committee appointed non-members of the committee to its subcommittee. These appointments were never authorized by the assembly (c.f. p. 497, ll. 16-19). If the appointments are ratified by the assembly, does that also, by extension, also ratify all actions done by the subcommittee while the breach was occurring? Or, do the actions taken by the subcommittee also need to be ratified? If no one raises a point of order on the issue of continuing breach in this case, should the parliamentarian point out the error in proceedings?
  5. At a previous meeting, our Board voted 6-1 to adopt a motion that provides for the later selection of one of three possible vendors for a particular service "upon a written majority decision of the Board." Most of us interpreted this motion as a one-time special rule allowing for the selection to occur without a meeting, which was adopted by more than 2/3 majority vote with all members present (only one person voted no). The question is... does this written majority decision per the adopted motion still need to be ratified at the next meeting?
  6. I'm treasurer of a small church of seven members. Two members of the board, a man and wife, and a take charge woman member proposed painting the interior of the church for $2800 in two colors. The ladies had selected the colors and everyone said to go for it in a democratic vote. It was finished and paid for in October. After the painter had finished and been paid, the ladies secretly decided that their color choice should be improved. No other members complained. A month later, one lady personally and secretly selected a boldly different shade and purchased enough to potentially repaint
  7. An officer of our lodge through inattention to duty evaded responsibility. He asked for approval to spend $900 on a laptop and represented be would buy X and had a quote for it. The assembly approved. He did not act promptly and decided he wanted Y that cost $1300. He did not return to the assembly for approval of the upgrade. I am treasurer and objected. So he will ask the assembly to approve a motion to ratify his action. According to our bylaws, the lodge is not obligated to honor unapproved contracts or purchases. Can the officer vote in favor of a motion that obviously is uniquely perso
  8. 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 distr
  9. I am of the understanding that an assembly without a quorum can take action so long as it is ratified at a later meeting. If an assembly without a quorum took action on a matter requiring a 2/3 vote for adoption such as to amend something previously adopted, would ratifying the action still take a majority vote?
  10. We have approved three minor changes to a church constitution. The question has been raised if we should ratify all the changes at once or can we (should we) vote to ratify the three changes all as one or individually?
  11. At a regularly called meeting of our church, a motion was made, seconded and passed by voice vote to approve three minor changes in our constitution. We are now ready to ratify after a 30-day wait (per our constitution). Some members are questioning one of the changes. The original motion that passed was to approve all amendments at once. Our constitution reads: ...B. be ratified, without change, at the next properly called meeting by a two-thirds vote of those Voting Members present and voting; and ... I note the "without change" above. My understanding is that if the membershi
  12. Our Hawaiian condominium association's board president recently wanted to select a bid and award a contract by email vote of board members. I pointed out that our bylaws require us to follow Robert's Rules of Order for transacting business and the bylaws do not specifically allow email votes. Out of the blue our managing agent produces the following memo from a lawyer we ocassionally use (dated two years ago, and not directed to our association). Our board president is now using this memo to justify using email voting. This memo flies in the face of so many aspects of RONR as I have come
  13. RRONR 10th Edition had info on proceeding withoujt a quorum in the case of an emergency wherein an opportunity would be lost and risking to act with the hope of future ratification. Is this info somehwere in the 11th edition?. We need to act on a time sensitive issue that was recommended in a committee report, but approval for the spending associated with the issue was not brought to a motion. The report, however, was accepted. Do we really need a motion associated with the spending of an item recommended in an accepted report? We've tried an unsuccessful "no-quorum" Call Meeting. What other
×
×
  • Create New...