In what situation would a member need to use a "point of order"?

A "point of order" is a formal statement made by a member during a meeting to call attention to a potential violation of the meeting’s rules or procedures, often based on the established governing documents, such as bylaws or parliamentary authority. This is why option B is the correct choice; it directly relates to maintaining order and adherence to the procedural rules of the meeting.

When a member uses a "point of order," they are essentially asserting that something has occurred that is inconsistent with the proper conduct of the meeting—this could involve incorrect procedures being followed, a breach of decorum, or other deviations from the established rules. It allows participants to ensure that the meeting runs smoothly and that their rights as members are preserved.

The other scenarios presented in the other choices do not necessarily pertain to procedural violations. For instance, expressing disagreement with the agenda (first option), suggesting a new member (third option), or asking about the venue (fourth option) do not directly invoke the rules governing the meeting, thereby making these situations unsuitable for raising a "point of order." The "point of order" is specifically designed for addressing procedural inaccuracies, making option B the most fitting context for its use.