refusing to correct eventhough it is corrected minutes then resolving the action in the meeting.

[rynait]

started, in prior topic "executive session resulting bylaw discussion/recommendation tabled ... " the context is now changed into this.

 

I did rise in that meeting pointing out there are errors in exectuive session section and the bylaw tabled section.    other member started to argue, leading subject a stray.  Chair was unable to control the meeting.   (i simply sat down and observed)

A) during my observation of the arguements,  I noted  result from the executive session is stated but not recorded in the minutes.  (the stated result, when i got home; checked in Robert rules and bylaws,  the result is not in order)

b )  the tabled was pointed out, but the same arguements; indicates members are divided on whether amendments are dead or carried into the meeting. (until the later action occurred). 

Half of the officers walked out of the room and spent 10 minutes whatever happened out there. 

They came back in, chair had secretary scroll down to the unfinished business section  and  instructed seated officer to say it.  the seated officer "moved all proposals and previously recommended materials from prior year to new bylaw committee."  (robert rule section 13). seconded.  no one rose to debate the motion then voted and passed.  Interpretatively,  is this another way to revive the materials.

Chair went back to the minutes starting to ask for approval as corrected.   two members and myself rose,  indicating procedure is not finished with correcting the minutes.  Chair refused to allow me to suggest corrections in executive session and tabled portion of the minutes, saying we fixed mistake with a motion in the unfinished business section (today meeting).  Then took care of the other two corrections and voted to approve the minutes as corrected.  (this means, the error remains in the minutes).

first of all  i am not going to act on the continuing error left in the minutes because I saw how officers acted (probably close to group dicator) through their actions during the meeting. I already lost interest in and  reduced my particpation with this organization almost a year ago.

 

however  i would like to hear your suggested action if future incident happens again. 

Edited May 1, 2022 at 06:31 AM by rynait

[Rob Elsman]

Well, even if we generously grant that the members would want to implement proper parliamentary procedure were they to know what it is, it seems clear to me that the collective knowledge of parliamentary procedure in this body is not very good.  Even worse, the presiding officer does not seem to know very much about the rules or the role of the presiding officer during meetings.

So, rather than wait until an "incident" happens again, I would recommend a proactive, preventative approach through immediate education.  By itself, though, education will not prevent "incidents".  The members must commit to the enforcement of the rules and an insistence that the presiding officer properly carry out his responsibilities.

[Josh Martin]

On 5/1/2022 at 12:47 AM, rynait said:

They came back in, chair had secretary scroll down to the unfinished business section  and  instructed seated officer to say it.  the seated officer "moved all proposals and previously recommended materials from prior year to new bylaw committee."  (robert rule section 13). seconded.  no one rose to debate the motion then voted and passed.  Interpretatively,  is this another way to revive the materials.

Certainly the assembly may refer motions to a committee. Generally speaking, to refer more than one matter to a committee at once requires a suspension of the rules, but no one objected, and it's too late to object now.

I would not describe this as "reviving" anything since I don't think the proposal in question ever "died," but in any event, the end result is that "all proposals and previously recommended materials from prior year" have been referred to the Bylaws Committee. (Although not clearly stated here, I assume this motion refers only to proposals and materials relating to bylaw amendments.)

For the latter question, I concur with Mr. Elsman that proactive education is necessary for this assembly. Attempting to address another of these incidents when it arises will likely have the same result as this time.

Edited May 1, 2022 at 08:13 PM by Josh Martin

[rynait]

On 5/1/2022 at 2:12 PM, Josh Martin said:

I would not describe this as "reviving" anything since I don't think the proposal in question ever "died," but in any event, the end result is that "all proposals and previously recommended materials from prior year" have been referred to the Bylaws Committee. (Although not clearly stated here, I assume this motion refers only to proposals and materials relating to bylaw amendments.)

Remember I said some members at that meeting was divided  between amendment has died or is carried into this meeting.  That action to whom ever reads both march minutes and April minutes could note/see progression perhaps similar to "reinventing the wheel".   (and yes Mr. Martin assume correctly, proposal and few recorded debate material was the topic  )

today, one of the member, (she is my friend and has intention to serve on new bylaws committee) asked me whether recommendation can be used again "aka copy verbatim".  I answered, there is no rules for that. 

I considered on telling my friend, inform committee use robert's rules 57.10 to .13 during report at meeting(s) year, and tell board/members we are correcting each recommendation(s) only; not the bylaws.

Edited May 1, 2022 at 11:27 PM by rynait

[Josh Martin]

On 5/1/2022 at 5:26 PM, rynait said:

today, one of the member, (she is my friend and has intention to serve on new bylaws committee) asked me whether recommendation can be used again "aka copy verbatim".  I answered, there is no rules for that. 

Yes, it is correct that (unless instructed otherwise by the assembly in this matter) the Bylaws Committee is free to submit an identical recommendation.