Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Point of Order re: Continuing Breach in Another Assembly


William Kennedy

Recommended Posts

How does one assembly (a special meeting of the membership) raise a point of order about a continuing breach of the Rules by another (the board)? The breach in question is clear, leaving no room for interpretation, and satisfies the other requirements in RONR. The Board has been notified informally, but to no avail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll agree with J.J. provided the Breach effects the membership in general.

 

However, if the breach effects (or is it affects?, or infects?) only some matter that relates to the Board exclusively, then only a Board member could bring up a point in a Board meeting.

 

(I would be hard pressed to dream up that sort of a "Board only" breach, to be sure.  But the imagination and ingenuity of meetings goers knows no bounds.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Bill K will need to explain what this "continuing breach of the Rules" is all about before any useful response can be provided.

Certainly. RONR p. 492, ll 6-9

 

A special committee many not be appointed to perform a task that falls within the function of an existing standing committee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh... Kay...  we are closing in on needed information.

 

Tell us who, what body, established the Standing Committee in question.

 

... and also whether or not this special committee that the board appointed is supposed to be a committee of the board or a committee of the full membership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... and also whether or not this special committee that the board appointed is supposed to be a committee of the board or a committee of the full membership.

 

Do you perhaps mean "established" rather than "appointed"?

 

A committee could be established by the full membership, while leaving the appointment of members of the committee to the Board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you perhaps mean "established" rather than "appointed"?

 

A committee could be established by the full membership, while leaving the appointment of members of the committee to the Board.

 

It seems rather obvious, in the context of the question asked, that the full membership did not establish this special committee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh... Kay...  we are closing in on needed information.

 

Tell us who, what body, established the Standing Committee in question.The Board proposed establishing the special committee in response to members' request to investigate a single issue beyond the scope of the standing committee's function

  1. The Board established the special committee in response to concerns about a single issue. Members were invited to join.
  2. Members have yet been unable to accept appointment; they believe the special committee's mandate is too broad and encompasses that of the standing committee established in the bylaws
  3. To date, the Board will not change special committee mandate. Amending the bylaws relevant to the standing committee function would impair its ongoing work

 

The member group is convinced that the Board simply does not want to address the single, important issue at hand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

  1. The Board established the special committee in response to concerns about a single issue. Members were invited to join.
  2. Members have yet been unable to accept appointment; they believe the special committee's mandate is too broad and encompasses that of the standing committee established in the bylaws
  3. To date, the Board will not change special committee mandate. Amending the bylaws relevant to the standing committee function would impair its ongoing work

 

The member group is convinced that the Board simply does not want to address the single, important issue at hand

 

I think we still need an answer to Dan's question about whether this is a committee of the board or a committee of the membership. For that matter, it may also be helpful to know whether the standing committee is a committee of the board or a committee of the membership. If you're not sure, ask yourself this - who do the committees report to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we still need an answer to Dan's question about whether this is a committee of the board or a committee of the membership. For that matter, it may also be helpful to know whether the standing committee is a committee of the board or a committee of the membership. If you're not sure, ask yourself this - who do the committees report to?

The standing committee (enumerated in the bylaws) is required to report to the Board on a monthly basis. It also reports to the membership at the AGM.

The special committee will be reporting to the Board

 

I think if you were to ask the Board the same question, they would have difficulty answering! And I doubt if the general membership has ever, in its long history, established a committee itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The standing committee (enumerated in the bylaws) is required to report to the Board on a monthly basis. It also reports to the membership at the AGM.

The special committee will be reporting to the Board

 

Well, you should really figure out whether the standing committee is a committee of the board or the membership. If it's a committee of the board, it should report to the board, and the board should report to the membership. If it's a committee of the association, it should report directly to the membership and bypass the board.

 

Since the special committee seems to be a committee of the board, I don't think it would be appropriate to raise a Point of Order about it at a membership meeting. Since the membership's main concern is not the committee's existence but its scope, I believe the best way to pursue this further would be to adopt a motion amending the committee's scope or ordering the board to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you should really figure out whether the standing committee is a committee of the board or the membership. If it's a committee of the board, it should report to the board, and the board should report to the membership. If it's a committee of the association, it should report directly to the membership and bypass the board.

 

Since the special committee seems to be a committee of the board, I don't think it would be appropriate to raise a Point of Order about it at a membership meeting. Since the membership's main concern is not the committee's existence but its scope, I believe the best way to pursue this further would be to adopt a motion amending the committee's scope or ordering the board to do so.

What is the criteria for making such a determination?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What determination are you referring to?

What determines whether it is a committee of the board or the membership? Is it as simple as asking what assembly it reports to, regardless of what assembly establishes it? You also suggested in post #15 that the association can, itself, amend the scope of a board committee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What determines whether it is a committee of the board or the membership? Is it as simple as asking what assembly it reports to, regardless of what assembly establishes it?

 

Normally the assembly it reports to and the assembly that establishes it are one and the same. But your organizations is weird and the board establishes everything, apparently. So yes, I'd go by which assembly it reports to.

 

You also suggested in post #15 that the association can, itself, amend the scope of a board committee.

 

Sure. The association can amend or rescind the board's actions, or give instructions to the board that it must carry out.

 

Unless your rules state otherwise. Judging by past experience with your questions, we probably should have mentioned that caveat earlier. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

  1. The Board established the special committee in response to concerns about a single issue. Members were invited to join.
  2. Members have yet been unable to accept appointment; they believe the special committee's mandate is too broad and encompasses that of the standing committee established in the bylaws
  3. To date, the Board will not change special committee mandate. Amending the bylaws relevant to the standing committee function would impair its ongoing work

 

The member group is convinced that the Board simply does not want to address the single, important issue at hand

 

 

Is this a valid summary?

  • There is an issue that people are concerned about. In response, the Board established special Committee X, and invited general members to join.
  • No general members are willing to join, as general members are concerned that mandate of Committee X is too broad, and overlaps onto the Standing Committee Y.
  • When this was pointed out to the Board, the Board refused the either change the mandate, or change the bylaws regarding Standing Committee Y.

I'm curious as to who serves on the Standing Committee - is it general members, or board members?

 

I'm also curious about the second point - all general members recognize this as a problem, yet a majority of the board doesn't view this as a problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this a valid summary?

  • There is an issue that people are concerned about. In response, the Board established special Committee X, and invited general members to join.
  • No general members are willing to join, as general members are concerned that mandate of Committee X is too broad, and overlaps onto the Standing Committee Y.
  • When this was pointed out to the Board, the Board refused the either change the mandate, or change the bylaws regarding Standing Committee Y.

I'm curious as to who serves on the Standing Committee - is it general members, or board members?

 

I'm also curious about the second point - all general members recognize this as a problem, yet a majority of the board doesn't view this as a problem?

You summary is correct.

 

  • The Standing Committee members are general members (plus president ex-officio)
  • A large majority of members (perhaps as many as 2/3) recognize this as a problem

 

The Board is opposed to the majority view with respect to the underlying issue.

 

I like Josh's suggestion in post #14  that " the best way to pursue this further would be to adopt a motion amending the committee's scope..." A Point of Order wouldn't accomplish this. I am assuming that this would involve proposing a motion to amend something previously adopted, even though it was adopted by another assembly (the board).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is good. Also, in the amendment, we could then require the committee to report to the general membership and include any minority reports?

 

Since it appears from what has been posted that this special committee is a committee of the board, and not a committee of the membership, I do not think that any attempt by the membership to amend the motion which the board adopted in order to create its own special committee would be appropriate.

 

However, assuming that this board is subordinate to the membership, the membership can give it whatever instructions it wishes in regard to this controversy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since it appears from what has been posted that this special committee is a committee of the board, and not a committee of the membership, I do not think that any attempt by the membership to amend the motion which the board adopted in order to create its own special committee would be appropriate.

 

However, assuming that this board is subordinate to the membership, the membership can give it whatever instructions it wishes in regard to this controversy.

"Instructions" achieving the same end, namely:

 

Amend the board's motion to change the scope of the special committee

Have the committee report to the general membership

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not think that any attempt by the membership to amend the motion which the board adopted in order to create its own special committee would be appropriate.

 

However, assuming that this board is subordinate to the membership, the membership can give it whatever instructions it wishes in regard to this controversy.

 

This transforms the initial question of this thread into a larger question:  If the Board adopts a motion that has an exclusive effect on the Board alone, with absolutely no effect on the general membership, may the general membership, which is superior to the Board, amend (or rescind) that motion?

 

Perhaps I should post this question on the "Advanced" Board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...