elections postponed

[Guest sharon]

The circuit court has issued an injunction against our Association (read Board) because it is felt that they interferred with the election process and tried to influence the outcome, through ignoring bylaws and custom, issuing/mailing incomplete ballots, mailing un-requested absentee ballots, writing that nominations from the floor will not be accepted, and refusing write-in candidates... Enough said on that.

If the Board refuses to mediate the complaints, the election could be postponed until we get a judgement from the court. Our Annual meeting of members is set for March 5 2011. The election of new Directors is reserved by our Bylaws, for the members at their Annual meeting which won't happen again until March 2012. It has been suggested that we could still hold the business section of the Annual meeting of Members and recess at the end, reserving the right of the members to hold the elections when this matter is settled (maybe June or July). Then reconvene the Members Meeting to hold the elections. The current Board unfortunately would then continue in office until those elections.

Does this solution sound okay? Any better suggestions that would comply with Roberts Rules?

[Kim Goldsworthy]

The circuit court has issued an injunction against our Association (read Board) because it is felt that they interferred with the election process and tried to influence the outcome, through ignoring bylaws and custom, issuing/mailing incomplete ballots, mailing un-requested absentee ballots, writing that nominations from the floor will not be accepted, and refusing write-in candidates... Enough said on that.

If the Board refuses to mediate the complaints, the election could be postponed until we get a judgement from the court. Our Annual meeting of members is set for March 5 2011. The election of new Directors is reserved by our Bylaws, for the members at their Annual meeting which won't happen again until March 2012. It has been suggested that we could still hold the business section of the Annual meeting of Members and recess at the end, reserving the right of the members to hold the elections when this matter is settled (maybe June or July). Then reconvene the Members Meeting to hold the elections. The current Board unfortunately would then continue in office until those elections.

Does this solution sound okay?

Any better suggestions that would comply with Roberts Rules?

Your questions are more in the scheme of tactics than questions about parliamentary procedure.

What you do, and when, is dependent on countless variables not mentioned in your post.

The fact that the legal system has intervened is yet another confounding factor.

I doubt a page citation will even apply, given the obstacles you have, hampering the plain application of Robert's Rules of Order.

[Chris Harrison]

The circuit court has issued an injunction against our Association (read Board) because it is felt that they interferred with the election process and tried to influence the outcome, through ignoring bylaws and custom, issuing/mailing incomplete ballots, mailing un-requested absentee ballots, writing that nominations from the floor will not be accepted, and refusing write-in candidates... Enough said on that.

If the Board refuses to mediate the complaints, the election could be postponed until we get a judgement from the court. Our Annual meeting of members is set for March 5 2011. The election of new Directors is reserved by our Bylaws, for the members at their Annual meeting which won't happen again until March 2012. It has been suggested that we could still hold the business section of the Annual meeting of Members and recess at the end, reserving the right of the members to hold the elections when this matter is settled (maybe June or July). Then reconvene the Members Meeting to hold the elections. The current Board unfortunately would then continue in office until those elections.

Does this solution sound okay? Any better suggestions that would comply with Roberts Rules?

Since there are legal proceedings ongoing what RONR says really is irrelevant in this case. I would suggest that you all seek direction from the Court as to what they would permit.

[Guest sharon]

leaving the legal side out of it.. Does RR allow a Members meeting to recess and reconvene at a given time or under given conditions?

[Gary Novosielski]

leaving the legal side out of it.. Does RR allow a Members meeting to recess and reconvene at a given time or under given conditions?

Well, no, not recess, which is during a meeting; but I've seen adjourned meetings done that way, using Fix the Time To Which To Adjourn as follows:

"I move that when this meeting adjourns, it adjourn to meet at the call of the chair." Then, the chair, with reasonable notice to all members, can set the time to resume the session.

If a regular meeting comes along before the adjourned meeting is ever called by the chair, the order expires. And it would not surprise me if the meeting must be called within a quarterly time interval, but my Book is at home, and I, regrettably, am not, so perhaps others will comment.

[David A Foulkes]

Well, no, not recess, which is during a meeting; but I've seen adjourned meetings done that way, using Fix the Time To Which To Adjourn as follows:

"I move that when this meeting adjourns, it adjourn to meet at the call of the chair." Then, the chair, with reasonable notice to all members, can set the time to resume the session.

If a regular meeting comes along before the adjourned meeting is ever called by the chair, the order expires. And it would not surprise me if the meeting must be called within a quarterly time interval, but my Book is at home, and I, regrettably, am not, so perhaps others will comment.

It must be called before the next regular meeting, whenever (or however far away) that is, be it monthly, quarterly, or even annually, I suppose.

p. 236 ll. 6-9

[Guest sharon]

Hope I don't take this thing into the realm of science fiction.

If we manage to appoint a Chairperson ProTem for this upcoming Members Annual Meeting. Would it be THAT chair that could call the members meeting to reconvene? Or would this still be reserved to the Board President?

[Chris Harrison]

Hope I don't take this thing into the realm of science fiction.

If we manage to appoint a Chairperson ProTem for this upcoming Members Annual Meeting. Would it be THAT chair that could call the members meeting to reconvene? Or would this still be reserved to the Board President?

You can't elect a Chair pro tem before the meeting starts. The President would call the meeting to order and at that point the rules can be suspended to elect a Chair pro tem (assuming the President and VP are at the meeting).

[Gary Novosielski]

You can't elect a Chair pro tem before the meeting starts. The President would call the meeting to order and at that point the rules can be suspended to elect a Chair pro tem (assuming the President and VP are at the meeting).

Chris, the question is not about who calls the meeting to order, it's about who calls the meeting.

If a meeting has been adjourned to meet at the call of the chair, but the chair of the first meeting was a chair pro-tem, is he "the chair" referred to, or is the regular presiding officer the only one authorized to call the adjourned meeting?

If the president is against having the meeting, the members would like to ensure that someone would call the meeting. I'm doubtful whether the chair pro tem of the first meeting would have that power, and leaning toward No.

I doubt that a meeting can be adjourned to meet at the call of Mr. Brown, where Mr. Brown is nobody in particular. But what's being sought here is a way to do that.

[Josh Martin]

If a meeting has been adjourned to meet at the call of the chair, but the chair of the first meeting was a chair pro-tem, is he "the chair" referred to, or is the regular presiding officer the only one authorized to call the adjourned meeting?

If there is any confusion, it would be best to specify this in the motion. I would generally assume such a motion to refer to the regular presiding officer unless the motion suggests otherwise.

I'm doubtful whether the chair pro tem of the first meeting would have that power, and leaning toward No.

I doubt that a meeting can be adjourned to meet at the call of Mr. Brown, where Mr. Brown is nobody in particular. But what's being sought here is a way to do that.

I see no reason why not. If a specific time, date, and place is not specified, it is most usual to meet at the call of the chair, but it seems to me the assembly has the authority to replace "the chair" with whoever it pleases.