Agenda for upcoming owner meeting

[mikalac]

Will the forum members comment on whether the parliamentary moves described below are in order for an upcoming owner meeting? Thanks for your kind assistance.

 

Notes: The first 7 motions described below were not sent in the notice to the owners, but they are not related to the bylaws. I sent them to the owners via email as a courtesy so that the owners would have time to think about them before the meeting. The next 8 motions were in the notice as email attachments. FYI, no questions are described in the notice as Special or General Orders; all are subsumed under New Business. The notice OOB is provided at the end of this post for reference.

 

=============

 

Chair: [Chair opens meeting. Confirms a quorum. Has counsel swear in judges of election. They depart to count ballots for candidates.]

 

Me: Mr. Pres., the members must adopt a meeting agenda for the remainder of this meeting. I move that the agenda for this meeting be as proposed in the OOB of the notice except that under New Business, the order of motions be as follows: (372)

1. Motion for the Board to study the purchase of a mobile microphone set for use in clubhouse meetings.

2. Motion for the Board to study the purchase of community bundled Comcast basic package.

3. Motion for the Board to solicit competitive bids on all contracts over $5,000.

4. Motion for Board to serve notice to two contractors that their contracts expire at end of this year, but they may compete with other contractors for the same work for next year.

5. Motion that landscaping monthly invoices contain details of work done and material used during the accounting period.

6. Motion to record and keep on file sprinkler system settings for owner review.

7. Motion for the Board to initiate a study on using PV and thermal solar for the community.

8. Norm's revision of the bylaws to be Considered As A Whole.

9. Norm's 13 bylaws amendments.

10. Motion to use electronic mail in notices.

11. Motion to increase membership fee.

12. Motion to make a Life Partner a Member of the Association instead of an Associate Member.

13. Motion to remove Robert's Rules of Order from section 14.03 of the bylaws.

14. Motion to remove Robert's Rules of Order from section 3.09 of the bylaws.

15. Motion that no motions be made to amend the By-Laws at this meeting.

 

Me: Mr. Pres., I now give you the first 7 motions that I will make under New Business.

 

[Question to forum: If the above proposed agenda is defeated, what is the next step? What if no one suggests another? What is the default agenda under New Business?]

 

Chair: We now will take a recess to conduct Board business.

(Chair has made the mistake of making a motion, but I will say nothing because I don't want to make him into a martyr by my raising too many PoO's against his rulings. No harm will have been done by his erroneous ruling.)

 

--------------- Time marches on.

 

Chair: New Business.

 

Me: Mr. Pres., I have a Request for Information. There is a mixture of owners and non-owners here and the voting on motions may be close. There must be 1, and only 1 vote, per Unit. What steps have been taken to assure the accuracy of the voting; that is, 1 vote per Unit. (294)

 

--------------- End of my motions. Notes on motions follow:

 

Motion 13: This motion removes RR from bylaws.

(I will make my speech during debate against Motion 13.)

(Assume that Motion 13 is adopted.)

 

Motion 14: This motion removes RR language that says RR is to be used at all owner and Board meetings.

(If Motion 13 is adopted, then Motion 14 will be adopted. If Motion 13 fails, then Motion 14 will fail.)

 

Motion 15: If Motion 13 is adopted, then it is moved that RR be removed from bylaws immediately.

 

Me: PoO. Mr. Pres., Motion 15 violates 2 NJ laws: (1) it violates section 45:22A-46(d) of the New Jersey Statutes, Title 15, and (2) it violates 46:8B-13(d) of the NJ Condominium Act, both of which say, "... no amendment shall be effective until recorded in the same office as the then existing bylaws."

(If Motion 13 fails, then Motion 15 fails.)

 

---------- End of notes on motions.

 

The above steps end New Business unless a member moves another motion not included in the above list.  Adjournment is in order.  If I see signs earlier that the members are leaving, I will move to Fix the Time to Adjourn to the following Saturday, same time and place.

 

For reference, below is the OOB as described in the bylaws and the Master Deed. It was sent in the notice via email along with motions 8 through 15 (see above) as email attachments.

 

3.13 Order of Business. The order of business at the annual meeting of the Owners or at any special meeting insofar as practicable shall be:

(a)  Calling of the roll.

(b-) Proof of notice of meeting and waiver of notice.

©  Reading and disposal of any unapproved minutes.

(d)  Appointment of Judges of election, if appropriate.

(e)  Election of Directors, if appropriate.

(f)  Receiving reports of officers.

(g)  Receiving reports of committees. 

(h)  Old business.

(i)  New business.

(j)  Adjournment.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Will the forum members comment on whether the parliamentary moves described below are in order for an upcoming owner meeting?

No.

 

This forum is to answer questions based on the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (RONR).

This forum is not for generic discussion of customized rules.

 

Q. Do you have a question which can be answered using only the default parliamentary rules of RONR?

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Me: Mr. Pres., the members must adopt a meeting agenda for the remainder of this meeting.

False.

 

Under the plain application of Robert's Ruiles of Order, when the class of business called "new business" is reached, the chair may prompt the members for new business.

There is nothing in RONR which would suggest that a meeting must adopt (!) a long laundry list of action items, where the class of "new business" already exists on one's order of business.

 

Example:

 

CHAIR: "Is there any new business?"

 

Voila!

[DrEntropy]

False.

 

Under the plain application of Robert's Ruiles of Order, when the class of business called "new business" is reached, the chair may prompt the members for new business.

There is nothing in RONR which would suggest that a meeting must adopt (!) a long laundry list of action items, where the class of "new business" already exists on one's order of business.

 

Example:

 

CHAIR: "Is there any new business?"

 

Voila!

 

I concur with KG here, don't over-complicate things!  Just offer your motions under new business.  The motions you are opposed to might not even come up! 

 

PS good use of font colors

[mikalac]

False.

 

Under the plain application of Robert's Ruiles of Order, when the class of business called "new business" is reached, the chair may prompt the members for new business.

There is nothing in RONR which would suggest that a meeting must adopt (!) a long laundry list of action items, where the class of "new business" already exists on one's order of business.

 

Example:

 

CHAIR: "Is there any new business?"

 

Voila!

IOW, when New Business arrives, just raise my hand to be allowed the floor like anyone else. Got it.

 

Is my request for an accurate voting procedure in order?

[mikalac]

I concur with KG here, don't over-complicate things!  Just offer your motions under new business.  The motions you are opposed to might not even come up! 

 

PS good use of font colors

Yes, I was getting too complicated. Under New Business, just raise my hand and bring up motions that I want in any order I want them. Having been through the mill here, I know what to say on all the motions listed here - mine or others.

[mikalac]

With the above scenario as background, if a member makes a motion to adjourn (with a second, but before the vote) so that my nefarious bylaw amendments and revision are not moved, it seems I have recourse to either of these options to avoid the adjournment:

 

1. Raise my hand to be recognized to move another question.

 

2. Fix the time to adjourn to the same place at the same time the next Saturday.

 

Am I in order?

[Josh Martin]

 

Is my request for an accurate voting procedure in order?

 

The question you have regarding what steps have been taken to ensure that the votes will be counted accurately (which is actually a Parliamentary Inquiry) is in order. 

 

With the above scenario as background, if a member makes a motion to adjourn (with a second, but before the vote) so that my nefarious bylaw amendments and revision are not moved, it seems I have recourse to either of these options to avoid the adjournment:

 

1. Raise my hand to be recognized to move another question.

 

2. Fix the time to adjourn to the same place at the same time the next Saturday.

 

Am I in order?

 

A motion to Fix the Time to Which to Adjourn is in order when a motion to Adjourn is pending. Very few other motions are. What sort of "another question" did you have in mind?

[mikalac]

 

 

 

 

The question you have regarding what steps have been taken to ensure that the votes will be counted accurately (which is actually a Parliamentary Inquiry) is in order. 

 

 

A motion to Fix the Time to Which to Adjourn is in order when a motion to Adjourn is pending. Very few other motions are. What sort of "another question" did you have in mind?

 

To move that my bylaws revision be Considered As A Whole (not Seriatim because of the many superficial changes) and after that my 13 bylaws amendments if my revision bites the dust. (Note that both are in the notice.)

[Richard Brown]

With the above scenario as background, if a member makes a motion to adjourn (with a second, but before the vote) so that my nefarious bylaw amendments and revision are not moved, it seems I have recourse to either of these options to avoid the adjournment:

 

1. Raise my hand to be recognized to move another question.

 

2. Fix the time to adjourn to the same place at the same time the next Saturday.

 

Am I in order?

 

Norm, I'm going to echo what Josh Martin said.  Several times over the past few days you have referred to a motion "to fix the time to adjourn".  That is not the correct motion for what you want to accomplish.  A motion to fix the time to adjourn simply sets up the time, in advance, of when THIS meeting is going to adjourn and everybody goes home.

 

You want the motion to fix the time to which to adjourn.  There is a world of difference between the two. The motion you keep referring to just sets the time to go home.  The motion to fix the time to which to adjourn sets the time when everyone is gong to come back to finish THIS meeting.

 

If you are afraid that people won't understand what that motion means, you can phrase it as "Mr. Chairman, I move that before we adjourn we set the time for an adjourned meeting to pick up where this one ends." Or "to finish the business of this meeting".

 

Look at the wording suggested on page 245 of RONR.  It gives you some forms and examples of how to phrase the motion.  It suggests this wording, among others, starting on line 7:  "I move that when this meeting adjourns, it adjourn to meet at 2:00 P.M. tomorrow".  Several other examples are given.

[mikalac]

Norm, I'm going to echo what Josh Martin said.  Several times over the past few days you have referred to a motion "to fix the time to adjourn".  That is not the correct motion for what you want to accomplish.  A motion to fix the time to adjourn simply sets up the time, in advance, of when THIS meeting is going to adjourn and everybody goes home.

 

You want the motion to fix the time to which to adjourn.  There is a world of difference between the two. The motion you keep referring to just sets the time to go home.  The motion to fix the time to which to adjourn sets the time when everyone is gong to come back to finish THIS meeting.

 

If you are afraid that people won't understand what that motion means, you can phrase it as "Mr. Chairman, I move that before we adjourn we set the time for an adjourned meeting to pick up where this one ends." Or "to finish the business of this meeting".

 

Look at the wording suggested on page 245 of RONR.  It gives you some forms and examples of how to phrase the motion.  It suggests this wording, among others, starting on line 7:  "I move that when this meeting adjourns, it adjourn to meet at 2:00 P.M. tomorrow".  Several other examples are given.

To Fix the Time to which to Adjourn is what I mean, even though I don't say it correctly. I don't actually use this expression, but rather say the words as given in the examples, which makes it clear that I want to continue the session at the same time and place next Saturday.

[Gary Novosielski]

With the above scenario as background, if a member makes a motion to adjourn (with a second, but before the vote) so that my nefarious bylaw amendments and revision are not moved, it seems I have recourse to either of these options to avoid the adjournment:

 

1. Raise my hand to be recognized to move another question.

 

2. Fix the time to adjourn to the same place at the same time the next Saturday.

 

Am I in order?

 

If by that you mean seek recognition in order to move to fix the time to which to adjourn, then yes, that's in order.  You can't be recognized to move just any old question, and you can't fix the time without a motion, a second, and a vote.

[mikalac]

If by that you mean seek recognition in order to move to fix the time to which to adjourn, then yes, that's in order.  You can't be recognized to move just any old question, and you can't fix the time without a motion, a second, and a vote.

I think I understand what you are saying, Gary. The other part of my question, which I'm still not sure of is this:

 

Suppose a member moves to Adjourn and it is seconded, but it has yet been put to a vote. As soon as I hear the motion to Adjourn or hear the second to that motion, can I raise my hand (our tradition to ask to be recognized) to move a (any) question that brings new business to the assembly? And if the chair recognizes me, can I move my question, thereby nullifying or delaying the motion to Adjourn? Moreover, if what I just said is in order, can I keep doing this until all my questions (motions) are completed? (Remember, these are all questions that bring new business before the assembly.)

[Kim Goldsworthy]

 

Suppose a member moves to Adjourn and it is seconded, but it has yet been put to a vote.

As soon as I hear the motion to Adjourn or hear the second to that motion, can I raise my hand (our tradition to ask to be recognized) to move a (any) question that brings new business to the assembly?

And if the chair recognizes me, can I move my question, thereby nullifying or delaying the motion to Adjourn?

Moreover, if what I just said is in order, can I keep doing this until all my questions (motions) are completed? (Remember, these are all questions that bring new business before the assembly.)

Norm,

No.

 

Since a MAIN MOTION is outranked by the pending motion "To Adjourn", then the proper chair response to any new business would be, "Main Motions are not in order right now; the motion To Adjourn must be decided first."

 

(Fix the Time To Which to Adjourn outranks Adjourn, but that ranking does not help your cause. You wish to make original main motions, and not move to create an adjourned meeting date/hour.)

[Josh Martin]

To move that my bylaws revision be Considered As A Whole (not Seriatim because of the many superficial changes) and after that my 13 bylaws amendments if my revision bites the dust. (Note that both are in the notice.)

 

These motions are not in order when a motion to Adjourn is pending.

 

Suppose a member moves to Adjourn and it is seconded, but it has yet been put to a vote. As soon as I hear the motion to Adjourn or hear the second to that motion, can I raise my hand (our tradition to ask to be recognized) to move a (any) question that brings new business to the assembly? And if the chair recognizes me, can I move my question, thereby nullifying or delaying the motion to Adjourn? Moreover, if what I just said is in order, can I keep doing this until all my questions (motions) are completed? (Remember, these are all questions that bring new business before the assembly.)

 

No to all of the above.

[Edgar Guest]

No to all of the above.

 

Norm,

No.

 

I can't help but think both statements will be frequently heard at next Saturday's meeting.