Guest Needtoknow Posted January 10, 2015 at 03:10 PM Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 at 03:10 PM I need confirmation on this...From Chapter 11 Membership-Officers"Ensuring fairness and impartialityThe most important principle that all presiding officers must remember is that they represent all the members, not just a select few and not just those with whom they agree. The duty of the presiding officer is to keep control of the meeting, but more than that it is to see that during debate, all the facts - pros and cons - come out in the discussion so that the assembly can make an informed decision. No member should feel that the presiding officer takes sides, but rather that the officer allows the assembly, through the democratic process, to arrive at the will of the majority. To ensure fairness and impartiality, the president adheres to the following rules:In a business meeting, the president cannot make motions or enter into debate."I just want to make sure that is right. About the president not being able to make motions?If the president at the last meeting made a motion that passed, is that motion null and void?Our By Laws state that our meetings shall follow Robert's Rules (latest edition) but none of the board members but one has a copy and the rest do not know it at all or thoroughly.Nothing in the CC&Rs conflicts with the above statement about the president.I've been told that ignorance of the rules does that make a person or situation exempt from them.And in the case of the Vice Pres. filling in, they are the acting president with all powers and duties, with no exceptions, unless stated in the by-laws or CC&Rs, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hieu H. Huynh Posted January 10, 2015 at 03:32 PM Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 at 03:32 PM The quoted passage is not from the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised. See this link for the Right Book. See if the details from FAQ #1 answer your question. Based on the information provided, I do not see a reason to rule that motion null and void. What is meant by "the case of the Vice Pres. filling in"? If the Vice President becomes the presiding officer if the President is absent for a meeting, then the Vice President only has the duties of presiding for that meeting. If the Vice President fills in the role of President because of a vacancy in the position of President, then that person is the President (there's no "acting" if this is the case). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 10, 2015 at 03:42 PM Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 at 03:42 PM I need confirmation on this...From Chapter 11Membership-Officers"Ensuring fairness and impartialityThe most important principle that all presiding officers must remember is that they represent all the members, not just a select few and not just those with whom they agree. The duty of the presiding officer is to keep control of the meeting, but more than that it is to see that during debate, all the facts - pros and cons - come out in the discussion so that the assembly can make an informed decision. No member should feel that the presiding officer takes sides, but rather that the officer allows the assembly, through the democratic process, to arrive at the will of the majority. To ensure fairness and impartiality, the president adheres to the following rules:In a business meeting, the president cannot make motions or enter into debate."I just want to make sure that is right. About the president not being able to make motions?If the president at the last meeting made a motion that passed, is that motion null and void?Our By Laws state that our meetings shall follow Robert's Rules (latest edition) but none of the board members but one has a copy and the rest do not know it at all or thoroughly.Nothing in the CC&Rs conflicts with the above statement about the president.I've been told that ignorance of the rules does that make a person or situation exempt from them.And in the case of the Vice Pres. filling in, they are the acting president with all powers and duties, with no exceptions, unless stated in the by-laws or CC&Rs, correct? What in the world are you quoting from? It's certainly not from RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Discouraged Posted January 10, 2015 at 03:47 PM Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 at 03:47 PM What in the world are you quoting from? It's certainly not from RONR.http://westsidetoastmasters.com/resources/roberts_rules/toc.htmlNo, not newly revised, but wish it was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 10, 2015 at 03:51 PM Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 at 03:51 PM http://westsidetoastmasters.com/resources/roberts_rules/toc.htmlNo, not newly revised, but wish it was Well, I see it appears to be titled Robert's Rules of Order, but it's not. It's junk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 10, 2015 at 08:42 PM Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 at 08:42 PM I just want to make sure that is right. About the president not being able to make motions? If the President is a member of the assembly, no. To say that the President cannot make motions goes too far. A more accurate summary of the rules on this subject can be found in FAQ #1. If the president at the last meeting made a motion that passed, is that motion null and void? No. And in the case of the Vice Pres. filling in, they are the acting president with all powers and duties, with no exceptions, unless stated in the by-laws or CC&Rs, correct? No. If the Vice President is "filling in" for the President at a meeting, he has only the duties and powers of the presiding officer, not any additional authority your rules grant to the President. The Vice President cannot "fill in" for the President's other duties in his absence unless your bylaws so provide. If the presidency is vacant, the Vice President becomes President (no "acting" about it). http://westsidetoastmasters.com/resources/roberts_rules/toc.htmlNo, not newly revised, but wish it was This is a third party guide to Robert's Rules of Order, and it appears to have some of the details wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.