Guest Guest Posted September 12, 2012 at 03:59 AM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 03:59 AM Parish council calls a general assembly meeting of its member. There was a quorum. The assembly meeting was called specifically in order to vote on taking out a bank load for new boiler and nothing else. It was advertised that way and the president of the parish board starting the meeting saying the same. A parishoner in attendance made a motion to have to have 2 boilers installed instead of one. The president of the board allowed the vote and it passed. Was motion valid since it had nothing to do with the agenda and therefore is the board bound by the motion which passed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted September 12, 2012 at 06:58 AM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 06:58 AM Yes it is bound by the motion which passed, unless I'm missing something that ought to be un-miss-able. "since it had nothing to do with the agenda": two boilers? That has nothing to do with an agenda about one boiler? Either I'm awfully dense, or, c'mon.Oh, and please, Guest_Guest, pick a name. Any. There are too many "Guest Guest's" around here. Yes I do realize what happens, and how troublesome the Capcha code is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted September 12, 2012 at 11:40 AM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 11:40 AM Parish council calls.... The assembly meeting was called specifically in order to vote on taking out a bank load for new boiler and nothing else.Yes it is bound by the motion which passed, unless I'm missing something that ought to be un-miss-able. Gary - it has all the smells of a Special Meeting, at which (as I know you know) only the business specified in the call of the meeting may be considered. The question was on getting a load (of money, I assume) from the bank, not how many boilers to buy with the load. Just sayin'........and wonderin'...... if a ratification of this alternate decision might not be warranted.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Boiler Posted September 12, 2012 at 06:13 PM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 06:13 PM This is Guest_Guest. David, you are correct - the meeting was convened as a special meeting and it was made known that the only reason for the meeting was for the loan (sorry for the typo), not to discuss how many boilers. But since the president took the vote now we have to find a way out (if possible) elegantly. Any ideas appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted September 12, 2012 at 06:20 PM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 06:20 PM If a motion was adopted that was outside of the business mentioned in the call of the meeting, that motion is null and void, and a point of order to that effect can be raised at any time. So, at the next meeting, make the point of order . . . elegantly, if you so choose. See RONR (11th ed.), p. 93, ll. 3-4; and section 23. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted September 12, 2012 at 08:31 PM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 08:31 PM Would it not depend on how the business was articulated in the call? If the decision to buy two boilers also contained a proposal to borrow a bigger load than the one contained in the call, that may be outside the scope of the notice, I'd think.But if no mention of an amount was in the notice, members would be on notice that the amount of money to be borrowed is without limit, and then what difference would it make how many boilers they purchased? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted September 12, 2012 at 08:39 PM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 08:39 PM The assembly meeting was called specifically in order to vote on taking out a bank load for new boiler and nothing else.. . . it was made known that the only reason for the meeting was for the loan (sorry for the typo) . . .If the decision to buy two boilers also contained a proposal to borrow a bigger load than the one contained in the call . . .I guess now it's tc's turn to apolgize for the typo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted September 12, 2012 at 08:40 PM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 08:40 PM I refuse.I will, however, apologize for trying to be funny and apparently missing the mark...I guess now it's tc's turn to apolgize for the typo. wait...what?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted September 12, 2012 at 08:55 PM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 08:55 PM wait...what??Touché!How 'bout we call it a draw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted September 12, 2012 at 09:12 PM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 09:12 PM Would it not depend on how the business was articulated in the call? Absolutely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Lages Posted September 13, 2012 at 10:21 PM Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 at 10:21 PM But if no mention of an amount was in the notice, members would be on notice that the amount of money to be borrowed is without limit, and then what difference would it make how many boilers they purchased?I'm not sure that previous notice of a motion involving any financial committment, such as the borrowing in this case, which does not specify an amount (or at least an upper limit) would be considered valid notice under RONR:"Unless the rules requie the full text of the motion... to be submitted in the notice, only the purport need be indicated; but such a statement of purport must be accurate and complete - as in 'to raise the annual dues to $20' - since it will determine what amendments are in order when the motion is considered." (RONR, p.122, ll.22-27) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted September 13, 2012 at 10:33 PM Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 at 10:33 PM I'm not sure that previous notice of a motion involving any financial committment, such as the borrowing in this case, which does not specify an amount (or at least an upper limit) would be considered valid notice under RONR:"Unless the rules requie the full text of the motion... to be submitted in the notice, only the purport need be indicated; but such a statement of purport must be accurate and complete - as in 'to raise the annual dues to $20' - since it will determine what amendments are in order when the motion is considered." (RONR, p.122, ll.22-27)See RONR (11th ed.), p. 93, ll. 13-21, since we're talking about business mentioned in the call of a special meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Lages Posted September 14, 2012 at 01:29 AM Report Share Posted September 14, 2012 at 01:29 AM Got it, Tim. Thanks for the calrification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.