how to uncomplicate the conditional membership for upcoming convention

[rynait]

Hello, 

 

in our existing bylaws of this organization has following...

 

section 6 a.  must have been active member for at least one year prior to election at an convention

 

section 8, All memberships except Honorary and fully paid Life shall expire at the end of the NMAD conference.

 

whereas in old 2009 bylaws copy, 

 

section 3  ... "membership must be current prior to beginning of the business meeting at the conference"

 

there was townhall meeting (no motions etc), looking at the actions generated by the president and the board.  following was realized:

 

translated this into...  members who paid membership in between the convention is not active member and is not allowed to vote, and has to re-pay on/after convention to maintain the status (toward becoming active member). This means if i paid 3 months prior to convention, i still have to pay again for 12 months (at 2014 convention) to earn the right to vote at next (at 2015) convention.

 

Now those members, both excluded and active, is determined to change the bylaws, removing year condition and shifting validity (using 2009 language), or repeal 2013 bylaws and revert to 2009 bylaws.

 

so the question; how does if active members act on the clauses/bylaws during the convention in order for excluded be able to cast their vote?

 

my first response use suspend the rule (RONR chapter 25) on the the snippet within the clause in the section 6.a

 

however realized this is bylaws, and have uncertainy of validity to suspend by assembly at convention.  

 

but another potential; move to repeal the 2013 bylaws and revert to 2009 bylaws. 

 

Then i realized something else;  during that said townhall meeting,  there are large quantity of members are facing the exclusion (approximately 2/3 of paid members is already excluded under the amendment).  I inquired those being excluded, whether they got notices to the convention. Most answered no. [gettingcopy of proposed (for 2014) bylaw amendments, agenda, registration forms]

 

A little helpful advice is needed;

 

what is appropriate action taken during the convention to allow excluded be able to cast their vote?

 

does "flyer" via email and website announcing the convention counts as notice even does not include proposed bylaws?

 

if active member actually succeed in passing either suspend or repeal routes, does the notice clause still apply afterwards (the actions i suggested would enable excluded member to vote afterwards)?

 

R

 

 

[Kim Goldsworthy]

... Does "flyer" via email and website announcing the convention counts as notice

even [if it] does not include proposed bylaws?

 

If the flyer reached 100% of the membership, then "MAYBE."

 

A flyer which advertises "Hey, it is convention time", is not the same thing as an official call-to-meeting issued by organization officially.

But if the flyer did reach 100% of the membership, and if the flyer did communicate that the flyer was serving as a call-to-meeting, then yes, it could be viewed that way.

It will take an interpretation by someone to judge it, though.

I would not take the flyer as a serious communication.

But I have not seen the flyer, and I don't know your history. -- The flyer might well conform to all previous flyers for all previous conventions.

That is why I said "maybe."

 

*****

 

As for the rest of the mess, it isn't a question about Robert's Rules of Order.

It is a question of "What do the bylaws say -- and which set(s) of bylaws are saying it?"

Someone will have to read the bylaws in full -- all of them! -- to decipher what rule applies.

[Timothy]

If the bylaws say certain people can't vote (which isn't obvious from the posted snippets), you can amend the bylaws with wording that would allow them to vote. Of course, you will have to follow whatever the current bylaws say about what must be done to amend them. As soon as the bylaws are amended, they go into affect.

[rynait]

active members chose not to use the 2013 bylaws, because it contains many 'missing', such as special meeting which on some occasion happen but not in 2013.  we have seen the so called 2014 proposed which is framing dicatorship system excluding membership (even with convention). thus we are not chosing to make amendments to either the awful 2013 or refuse to ratify or vote for 2014 proposals.

 

thus the decision to abolish the 2013 completely  and revert or go back to 2009 which has all the necessary stuff including special meeting, notices, so forth. 

 

I am sure there are several possible action involved on fixing the bylaws is already known (not sure which one is cleanest and simplest).

 

thus my last question, for example

 

if convention is met (with active members getting notice),  then an valid action applying on bylaws that resulting in excluded members becomes included (right to attend/vote), could subsequent actions be invalid because notices was not sent to excluded members. or does excluded members remains excluded until adjournment?

[Richard Brown]

if convention is met (with active members getting notice),  then an valid action applying on bylaws that resulting in excluded members becomes included (right to attend/vote), could subsequent actions be invalid because notices was not sent to excluded members. or does excluded members remains excluded until adjournment?

With this last statement, my head is spinning even more than it was to start with.  I'm hoping others have a better grip on what is going on than I do.  There are some awfully good people in here trying. 

[Timothy]

I think what rynait is trying to say is that if the 2009 version of the bylaws is readopted, there will be some people who no longer meet the requirements of membership. If so, then the question rynait is asking is what it means since these people have not been given notice that they will be kicked out.

[Josh Martin]

if convention is met (with active members getting notice),  then an valid action applying on bylaws that resulting in excluded members becomes included (right to attend/vote), could subsequent actions be invalid because notices was not sent to excluded members. or does excluded members remains excluded until adjournment?

 

The rule in question may not be suspended, but it may be amended. Unless the assembly adopts a proviso which states otherwise, the amendment takes effect immediately. So those individuals who are now members of the convention are free to vote. The assembly's actions will still be valid, however, because notice was properly sent to everyone who was a member at the time the notice was sent. The Secretary does not need to try to predict the future when sending notices.

 

I think what rynait is trying to say is that if the 2009 version of the bylaws is readopted, there will be some people who no longer meet the requirements of membership. If so, then the question rynait is asking is what it means since these people have not been given notice that they will be kicked out.

 

I think he's saying the opposite, actually. There will be some people who currently do not meet the requirements of membership, but will meet the requirements if the amendment is adopted.

[rynait]

Thanks Josh,

 

I think he's saying the opposite, actually. There will be some people who currently do not meet the requirements of membership, but will meet the requirements if the amendment is adopted.

thatis what i meant. 

 

so in overall summary;  

 

a) if active members take actions on the bylaws (repeal/amendment/reverting), there is no way for excluded member to vote on the bylaws action. But if change makes excluded member become 'active' &  is passed, then the new added members can take other actions after the bylaws change is resolved.  

 

b )if membership changes (repeal/amendment/reverting bylaws) in midist of the convention, notice does not apply.

 

c) the notice applies to all valid or active members at start of convention.

 

R

[Josh Martin]

c) the notice applies to all valid or active members at start of convention.

 

No, the notice applies to all valid members at the time the notice is sent. If the rules require that notice is sent 30 days before the convention and someone joins the society 15 days before the convention, the notice is still valid, even though it was not sent to that new member. As I stated before, the Secretary is not required to predict the future when sending notices.

[rynait]

Hello, 

 

the c) that you and I stated,  is the same interpretation. so I appreciated on Josh's simplicity and restate #c...

 

c) notice requirements applies to all valid and active members at the time the notice is sent. notice requirement is not applicable on new or changing membership between following day notice was sent and convention adjournment.

 

R

[rynait]

Hello, 

 

extending on this with results. 

 

members that was (excluded) was allowed in and we had a 'table talk' style inquiring to the style of exclusion the board had interpreted (exclusion meeting showed 66 validly excluded members and 21 active members being present, which reveals an failed majority in respect to transacting business for the organization). 

 

The result was a compromise,  that they would recognize membership as long as they have at least paid their dues ayear before the last year convention and pay (immediately) at the present convention. thus closing up the exclusion loophole. Interesting, this compromise is not voted or adopted interpretation, and could cause additional complications if 2014 proposed bylaws amendment is adopted.

 

Well on the next day, 38 members (only 2 opposed) voted to reject the 2014 bylaws anyway (because of prevaling exclusion).

 

They proposed to form an 'bylaws' committee in a different manner. The change is on how committee members is selected, usually by president only. This time members selects amongst themselves to serve on that committee (and the intent is defined, thusly).

 

The intent is fix errors found in the bylaws relating to missing parts, board election, and membership exclusion.

 

R