Building on club property

[Guest Eileen]

Our Country Club is currently in a small dispute over building a small pavilion on our beach.

The membership owns two pieces of property. We own a ball field/playground as well as a small lake with a beach.

In the summer, we use the beach as members to swim, but also run a swim team, which competes against local lakes. Throughout July, we play host to a number of the swim meets. At the swim meets, we sell food cooked by swim mothers to benefit the swim team. Our beach sits on a main road. At the top of the property, up near the road, we have a pebbled flat pad area where we set up the food sale.

Similarly, we use the ball field/playground pretty much all year, and do hold member events there as well. There is a storage container on the property, which is used to keep any recreational supplies.

It was proposed by our Board of Trustees to build a pavilion on the ball field originally, which would have been placed over by the container. This was proposed during a General Membership meeting, which wasn't well attended but had a quorum by attendance and proxy. During the meeting, it was decided that the pavilion would be at the beach, rather than the ball field. Sadly, most people assumed that the building would be up on the pad, where the food is served during swim meets, however, once the permit was researched, we discovered we were unable to put the pavilion in that spot without obtaining an expensive variance, which once applied for would not guarantee a variance would be granted.

When two possible building spots were mapped out in accordance with town codes, they ended up being in places where some people feel the aesthetics of the beach would be compromised, and it just didn't make sense. When the membership was asked to vote on one of the two locations, many people realized how unhappy they would be with the building in any of the two spots. Due to the lack of participation by a good portion of these same people being asked to now vote on the location, this came as a big surprise to them and suddenly, they were expressing their feelings of dissatisfaction with the entire project.

The Board is in a dilemma, because erecting the pavilion has already been voted on and approved, therefore majority rules based on the attendance at the time of the original pavilion vote, and feels compelled to move forward with one of the two spots regardless of people's objections. In addition, the Board is concerned with setting a precedent on project voting in the future.

My question is, under Roberts Rules of Order, is there anything that can be done to reverse this so that the pavilion is not erected on the beach, but rather put at the ball field instead, if that's what the majority wants?

[Tim Wynn]

My question is, under Roberts Rules of Order, is there anything that can be done to reverse this so that the pavilion is not erected on the beach, but rather put at the ball field instead, if that's what the majority wants?

See RONR (11th ed.), section 35, for Rescind/Amend Something Previously Adopted. The previously adopted motion can be amended or rescinded in less time than it took me to read the extensive preface to your question.

[Guest Edgar]

The previously adopted motion can be amended or rescinded in less time than it took me to read the extensive preface to your question.

At least it didn't begin with "I'll try to keep this short . . . ". That's usually a sign to run the other way.

[Guest Eileen]

Thank you for the replies. New to this, and obviously wanted to make sure you understood full details, in the hopes that the answer would be as accurate as possible. Thanks again.