Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Bylaws amendments considered seriatim


Guest Sall

Recommended Posts

We will be considering a series of bylaws amendments seriatim.  If a member makes a motion to strike one of the amendments from the package in order to defeat it, the motion is seconded and debate has started, may another member make a request to consider it separately from the package, or must that member wait until the motion to strike is decided?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the explanation.  Given this, I have another question.  One of the Bylaws amendments is very detailed and complicated and we suspect that the majority of our members would prefer to strike the amendment and instead present a resolution to order the study the issues and then present a better amendment at the next meeting.  Is there a way to accomplish this without having to consider the amendment and a myriad of possible amendments to the amendment, which will probably be offered in an attempt to fix the amendment in case it isn't striken?  We would like to avoid wasting all of that time with amendments to the amendment if the end result is that the amendment will be striken.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, I would like to know what you mean when you say that "We will be considering a series of bylaws amendments seriatim."

Is this a general revision of the bylaws (as discussed on p. 593 of RONR, 11th ed.) that is being proposed for adoption, or is this simply a case in which a number of independent proposals to amend the bylaws are being offered in a single motion? If the latter is the case, has the assembly already made the decision to consider this motion seriatim, or are you simply anticipating that it will do so?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The latter is the case.  We have a committee that compiles all of the member-proposed bylaws amendments into a document that is mailed to the members ahead of the meeting.  At the meeting the committee chair usually makes an amendment to adopt the proposed amendments seriatim.  From there we start to go through each amendment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Guest Sally said:

The latter is the case.  We have a committee that compiles all of the member-proposed bylaws amendments into a document that is mailed to the members ahead of the meeting.  At the meeting the committee chair usually makes an amendment to adopt the proposed amendments seriatim.  From there we start to go through each amendment.

These individual amendments would, ordinarily, be moved one at a time. If a single motion (it would not be an amendment) is made to adopt all of them together, one or more of the several proposed amendments must receive separate consideration and vote at the request of a single member, but this request must be made before the assembly agrees to consider seriatim the motion which was made to adopt them all.

Frankly, when you say that "the committee chair usually makes an amendment to adopt the proposed amendments seriatim" it appears that there may be a substantial misunderstanding as to what is meant by seriatim consideration, and how it is handled. 

I suggest a careful read of Sections 27 and 28 in RONR (11th ed.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry - that was an early-morning typo.  The committee chair makes a motion to adopt the bylaws package seriatim, not an amendment.  Once that motion is made we go through each amendment which may then be discussed and/or amended.  At the very end we vote on the motion to adopt them all.  Where we may be making a mistake is we have allowed a motion to strike one of the amendments from the package at the time that particular amendment is being discussed.  If that motion is adopted the amendment is removed from the package and defeated.  Based on the earlier response to my question, it seems the motion to strike can not be made until we have discussed all of the individual amendments and are then considering the motion to adopt all of the amendments seriatim.  Is that correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds as if you have a number of individual amendments to consider at your meeting (and not a bylaws revision). As Mr. Honemann states, they would ordinarily be moved one at a time. Perhaps this motion by the committee chair to "adopt the bylaws package seriatim" is an unnecessary step that is unnecessarily complicating your process. Why not just handle each proposed amendment individually? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Guest Sally said:

I'm sorry - that was an early-morning typo.  The committee chair makes a motion to adopt the bylaws package seriatim, not an amendment.  Once that motion is made we go through each amendment which may then be discussed and/or amended.  At the very end we vote on the motion to adopt them all.  Where we may be making a mistake is we have allowed a motion to strike one of the amendments from the package at the time that particular amendment is being discussed.  If that motion is adopted the amendment is removed from the package and defeated.  Based on the earlier response to my question, it seems the motion to strike can not be made until we have discussed all of the individual amendments and are then considering the motion to adopt all of the amendments seriatim.  Is that correct?

Well, it appears that if the committee chair makes a motion "to adopt the bylaws package seriatim" he is not only moving, in a single motion, that all of the proposed bylaw amendments be adopted (which he certainly can do, although his motion will have to be divided on the demand of a single member), he is also moving, in this same motion, that the motion he is making be considered seriatim. If I was presiding, I'd rule this combination of motions out of order, and even if I didn't, any member could object to it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The actual motion as currently printed in the business session script is:  "I move the adoption of Amendments to the Bylaws as printed in the Call to Convention".

Once that motion is made we go through each amendment which may then be discussed and/or amended.  At the very end we vote on the motion to adopt them all.  Where we may be making a mistake is we have allowed a motion to strike one of the amendments from the package at the time that particular amendment is being discussed.  If that motion is adopted the amendment is removed from the package and defeated.  Based on the earlier response to my question, it seems the motion to strike can not be made until we have discussed all of the individual amendments and are then considering the motion to adopt all of the amendments seriatim.  Is that correct?

 

32 minutes ago, Tom Coronite said:

It sounds as if you have a number of individual amendments to consider at your meeting (and not a bylaws revision). As Mr. Honemann states, they would ordinarily be moved one at a time. Perhaps this motion by the committee chair to "adopt the bylaws package seriatim" is an unnecessary step that is unnecessarily complicating your process. Why not just handle each proposed amendment individually? 

In answer to this, we have 64 amendments to the bylaws proposed.  Almost all of them are non-controversial and will generate little to no discussion or amending.  Presenting them as a package has typically saved time since we only vote once at the end.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I don't understand why the motion to Consider Items Seriatim is even necessary.  It sounds like the committee chair is taking each bylaw amendment, bundling them all up into one package then asking them to vote on each amendment individually.  Why not just present them all as separate items?  If the idea is to vote on them all at once to save time, then why are they asking for (effectively) a Division of the Question?  Or why not present them all at once and have a member Call for a Division if necessary?

In my opinion, the committee chair has misinterpreted p 593.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know with adopting standing rules a member can ask for individual rules to be considered separately.  The rest of the rules are voted on and then the ones under consideration are treated separately.  This prevents having to trudge through all of the non-contraversial ones that would be necessary in a Division.  Is there a similar technique for bylaw amendments?  Would it be in order to move to consider Proposed Amendment #37 separately?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Guest Sally said:

The actual motion as currently printed in the business session script is:  "I move the adoption of Amendments to the Bylaws as printed in the Call to Convention".

Once that motion is made we go through each amendment which may then be discussed and/or amended.  At the very end we vote on the motion to adopt them all.  Where we may be making a mistake is we have allowed a motion to strike one of the amendments from the package at the time that particular amendment is being discussed.  If that motion is adopted the amendment is removed from the package and defeated.  Based on the earlier response to my question, it seems the motion to strike can not be made until we have discussed all of the individual amendments and are then considering the motion to adopt all of the amendments seriatim.  Is that correct?

What makes you think this motion is to be considered seriatim? This is what is causing all the confusion.

Any of the proposed amendments may be struck out of the package by majority vote, or removed for separate consideration upon the demand of any member.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Guest Sally said:

I'm sorry - that was an early-morning typo.  The committee chair makes a motion to adopt the bylaws package seriatim, not an amendment.  Once that motion is made we go through each amendment which may then be discussed and/or amended.  At the very end we vote on the motion to adopt them all.  Where we may be making a mistake is we have allowed a motion to strike one of the amendments from the package at the time that particular amendment is being discussed.  If that motion is adopted the amendment is removed from the package and defeated.  Based on the earlier response to my question, it seems the motion to strike can not be made until we have discussed all of the individual amendments and are then considering the motion to adopt all of the amendments seriatim.  Is that correct?

Just to add, amendments are not out of order when sections are Considered by Seriatim.  After that, then amendments are made to the document as a whole.

But I am still confused by the motion "Adopt" the package seriatim.  Is the Chair interpreting that as "Considering" by Seriatim because if it is a Division (as I would interpret such a motion) then each amendment would be dealt with as a separate item. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SaintCad said:

Just to add, amendments are not out of order when sections are Considered by Seriatim.  After that, then amendments are made to the document as a whole.

But I am still confused by the motion "Adopt" the package seriatim.  Is the Chair interpreting that as "Considering" by Seriatim because if it is a Division (as I would interpret such a motion) then each amendment would be dealt with as a separate item. 

Forget it. All this seriatim business appears to have been a red herring.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

What makes you think this motion is to be considered seriatim? This is what is causing all the confusion.

Any of the proposed amendments may be struck out of the package by majority vote, or removed for separate consideration upon the demand of any member.

In the explanatory information sent with the amendments the chair states we will be considering them "seriatim, which means as a package".  I now understand that the explanatory information is not correct.  Thank you for clearing this up.  And this now brings me back to my original question:

If a member moves to strike one of the amendments from the package, that motion is seconded and is being debated, may another member demand that amendment be removed for separate consideration at that time or must the member wait until until the motion to strike is decided?

Thank you for all of your assistance!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Guest Sally said:

In the explanatory information sent with the amendments the chair states we will be considering them "seriatim, which means as a package".  I now understand that the explanatory information is not correct.  Thank you for clearing this up.  And this now brings me back to my original question:

If a member moves to strike one of the amendments from the package, that motion is seconded and is being debated, may another member demand that amendment be removed for separate consideration at that time or must the member wait until until the motion to strike is decided?

Thank you for all of your assistance!

It's clear that "a motion to divide the main question cannot be made while an amendment to the main question is pending" (RONR, 11th ed., p. 271, ll. 14-16), and so I assume that the same rule applies with respect to a demand for a division.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, I suggest that you be very careful to ensure that your chair does not get away with handling this in such a way that she can claim that the assembly has agreed (presumably by unanimous consent) that the motion to adopt the amendments will be considered seriatim. Once the assembly has agreed to seriatim consideration, no division of the question will be able to be made. (RONR, 11th ed., p. 277, ll. 13-16).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for the advice.  We will work on our language to make sure there is no confusion.  I believe (hope) that the misinformation is just a mistake and not an attempt to manipulate the proceedings, but i will keep an eye out for that.  I appreciate your assistance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

By the way, I suggest that you be very careful to ensure that your chair does not get away with handling this in such a way that she can claim that the assembly has agreed (presumably by unanimous consent) that the motion to adopt the amendments will be considered seriatim. Once the assembly has agreed to seriatim consideration, no division of the question will be able to be made. (RONR, 11th ed., p. 277, ll. 13-16).

Couldn't there be a motion to Consider as a Whole and if it passes then call for a Division?

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...