Search the Community

If your bylaws do not state how much notice has to be given or what must be on notice of meeting. What rule applies?. Ex we had one special meeting with three hours notice . on notice did not include topics

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 specifically for that purpose if not as a special order of business at the next regular meeting at the latest, allowing for it to be postponed definitely but disallowing it to be laid on the table such that ratification could ever fall to the ground), what is to keep a majority at a special meeting from abusing the rights of absentees? That actions "must" be ratified seems insufficient, creating an indefinite timeline. Is there no statute of limitations on the motion to ratify (as opposed to the motion to censure)? Or can an organization go on acting as though business conducted outside the scope of a special meeting is valid so long as it is 'eventually' ratified? I'm concerned that organizations which fail to ratify such actions in a timely manner may have several invalidated (i.e., not-yet-validated) actions indefinitely. Avoidance seems permissible by the current language of RONR. And such prolonged neglect seems to violate the rights of absentees.

Hello forum, I wanted to inquire about a situation I am finding myself with a Student Government that I serve as the parliamentarian on at my university. We currently hold official sessions according to our approved meeting times, which is roughly every other week, with an informal "committee" meeting on off weeks. This week would be our unofficial "committee" meeting, since our last official session was last week. We however learned about an issue with a constitution change we voted on a few weeks ago. Any constitution change requires approval from our university administration and at the beginning of this week they notified us we needed a revote. The change we implemented must be voted on ASAP, and could not wait a week, so the group wanted to have a special meeting this week even though it is not an official meeting time based on our schedule. As the parliamentarian I went to check our special meeting protocol in our by laws, and released we have no information or procedure outlined for special meetings. The only thing listed in our bylaws is that "if a change in the meeting schedule wants to be made it requires a simple majority vote to amend the official listed schedule" From my knowledge Robert's Rules doesn't have procedure for special meetings, and since our by laws do not outline it either, there is no way for our group to meet while remaining in line with rules. I was wondering if there is any procedural thing I am missing or an additional path we could take to still hold a meeting this week, out of our normal meeting schedule. Thanks!

I am treasurer of a women's organization with bylaws that some interpret differently. "Who" gets to decide how wording will be interpreted when there is a difference of opinion by a very small, but vocal minority of past officers? A proposed budget was tabled at a recent meeting in order to obtain clarifying info from me (the treasurer) who was out of the state. Now, less than 3 of 36 members want to have the 2018 year-long budget approved by email vote in a special meeting. The other members have not had any opportunity to weigh in or discuss the budget. Our by-laws state: "Special meetings may be conducted via email as long as the topic consists SOLELY of A spending issue." (My caps & bold) I maintain that passing a budget is NOT SOLELY A spending issue. It requires a motion, discussion and ultimatley acceptance of all income sources and projections, all line item expenses & projected reserves. After the budget was tabled, one of the vocal few decided to submit a budget with increases on 2 proposed budget line items, obviously projecting a (significantly) lesser ending balance year end. She (a past president and treasurer) maintains all this can be approved via a Special Email meeting. I'm saying "huh????" on so many levels! It was our president's first month in office and first meeting. Can you help sort this out?

I have a group that I am working with that has a 2/3 requirement for quorum. The board has 6 members, so 2/3 would be 4. Do they need 4 plus the chair designated in their bylaws to conduct a meeting, meaning that 5 would actually need to be present? Or would they have quorum with just any 4 members even if the designated chair is absent? Additionally, this is not a regularly called meeting of the board. Their bylaws specifically state that only the president can call special meetings and he did not. The other board members are attempting to hold a special meeting without the president and vice-president (the designated chair) present. Would this be allowed under Robert's Rules? Thank you!