Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Motion in conflict with the bylaws


Guest Carolyn

Recommended Posts

At a previous meeting of a board on which I serve and of which I am the immediate past president -- and at the meeting in which I was not in attendance,  a motion was made, seconded and approved that is in conflict with the bylaws.  I'm uncertain how to respond at our next meeting.  Do I raise the questions during the approval of the minutes?  What is the correct language for raising the question - do I simply state that the motion as approved is out of order or null and void?  And then what?  Thanks for your help.

Carolyn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the minutes correctly state what was brought up and passed, you just agree that the minutes are correct - even though the motion was, from what you say, out of order. 

But then you raise a point of order that the motion in question is indeed out of order, and the chair rules on your point.

For details, and what can happen next, see RONR pages 247 and following.  (Too much to even summarize here, by me anyway.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait!

Just because you see a conflict, that by itself does not necessarily imply that a correction is necessary.

For example, if you have a "mission statement" embedded in your bylaws, and your adopted motion seems to be at odds with the mission statement, that conflict is not necessarily one where a fix is necessary.

It all depends on the kind of conflict. -- Perhaps your interpretation is wrong? Perhaps the motion is merely variation, and not a true conflict, of the given bylaw rule?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kim Goldsworthy said:

Wait!

Just because you see a conflict, that by itself does not necessarily imply that a correction is necessary.

For example, if you have a "mission statement" embedded in your bylaws, and your adopted motion seems to be at odds with the mission statement, that conflict is not necessarily one where a fix is necessary.

It all depends on the kind of conflict. -- Perhaps your interpretation is wrong? Perhaps the motion is merely variation, and not a true conflict, of the given bylaw rule?

Wait yourself, Kim!

Those are the sorts of questions what would or could get clarified in any discussion about the merits of the point, following an appeal.  We, here, have no idea what the point of order, &c., will entail  --  anything else is pure guesswork.

But a point of order has to be raised first to get things under way.  That is the next parliamentary step.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...