grammaconnie Posted February 7, 2011 at 08:31 PM Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 at 08:31 PM I have two questions.1) a Motion was introduced, member who made motion discussed it, but it was not seconded and it was not voted on. Is this motion put into the minutes or omitted from them?2) An emergency meeting of the board ws called - 4 of the 7 members were present. Due to the expertise of the secretary's background on the subject matter, she was asked by the president to run this meeting. The president then asked another board member present to take the minutes. How do we handle addressing this in the minutes of the meeting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GcT Posted February 7, 2011 at 08:56 PM Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 at 08:56 PM 1. Yes. See Official Interpretation #2006-7, "Unseconded Motions Recorded in Minutes," athttp://robertsrules.com/interp_list.html#2006_72. You mention who presided, and who served as secretary. The person who served as secretary signs the draft she produced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted February 7, 2011 at 09:42 PM Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 at 09:42 PM I have two questions.1) a Motion was introduced, member who made motion discussed it, but it was not seconded and it was not voted on. Is this motion put into the minutes or omitted from them?2) An emergency meeting of the board ws called - 4 of the 7 members were present. Due to the expertise of the secretary's background on the subject matter, she was asked by the president to run this meeting. The president then asked another board member present to take the minutes. How do we handle addressing this in the minutes of the meeting?How did a member get to "discuss" his motion? Did the chair just go ahead and say "Debate is now in order, Mr. X has the floor?" Most (but not all motions) "require" a second, although once debate has begun the lack of a second is immaterial. And why was there no vote? Did the motion get tabled or postponed? Sounds like you have an ineffective chair here.Speaking of which, I don't think the president gets to appoint a chair, or secretary, unilaterally, without the assembly's approval, although if no one objects, we're into that nasty area of "general consent." Not sure what the "subject matter" was that the secretary had such expertise on that it warranted also presiding. The expertise of the "subject matter" to be debated and/or voted on does not translate to expertise in presiding. Sounds like you have an ineffective chair here x 2.But, water over the dam now. Food for thought. Just sayin'..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted February 7, 2011 at 11:49 PM Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 at 11:49 PM Yes, this chair sounds very ineffective indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.