Vote Necessary to Adopt Agenda

[Matt Schafer]

Assume a society that has regular monthly business meetings, that has adopted RONR as its parliamentary authority in its bylaws, and that has not adopted a special order of business. At the beginning of one of its regular meetings, a member moves the adoption of an agenda that contains two items which have specific times assigned to them (which would make them special orders if the agenda is adopted, RONR, 10th ed., p. 360, l. 12-14). Is a majority vote sufficient to adopt the agenda, or is a two-thirds vote required?

Page 360, lines 18-20 indicate that a majority vote is sufficient. But lines 20-24 state that an agenda containing one or more special orders requires a two-thirds vote during a session that already has an order of business. Since a regular meeting of any society that has meetings within a quarterly interval already has an order of business (p. 342, l. 7-23), I'm not sure which vote is required.

[J. J.]

Assume a society that has regular monthly business meetings, that has adopted RONR as its parliamentary authority in its bylaws, and that has not adopted a special order of business. At the beginning of one of its regular meetings, a member moves the adoption of an agenda that contains two items which have specific times assigned to them (which would make them special orders if the agenda is adopted, RONR, 10th ed., p. 360, l. 12-14).

It would not normally adopt an agenda as the standard order of business would be followed (p. 340).

[hmtcastle]

I'm not sure which vote is required.

Wouldn't the principle (p.571), that a general rule (e.g. agendas) yields to a specific rule (e.g. agendas containing special orders), apply?

[Dan Honemann]

Assume a society that has regular monthly business meetings, that has adopted RONR as its parliamentary authority in its bylaws, and that has not adopted a special order of business. At the beginning of one of its regular meetings, a member moves the adoption of an agenda that contains two items which have specific times assigned to them (which would make them special orders if the agenda is adopted, RONR, 10th ed., p. 360, l. 12-14). Is a majority vote sufficient to adopt the agenda, or is a two-thirds vote required?

Page 360, lines 18-20 indicate that a majority vote is sufficient. But lines 20-24 state that an agenda containing one or more special orders requires a two-thirds vote during a session that already has an order of business. Since a regular meeting of any society that has meetings within a quarterly interval already has an order of business (p. 342, l. 7-23), I'm not sure which vote is required.

In the case you describe, the session already has a order of business prescribed for it. As a consequence, a two-thirds vote is required in order to adopt an agenda conflicting with this previously adopted order (RONR, 10th ed., p. 360, ll. 20-24).

[Matt Schafer]

Wouldn't the principle (p.571), that a general rule (e.g. agendas) yields to a specific rule (e.g. agendas containing special orders), apply?

I thought about that. The principles on pages 570 through 573 are given as guidance for bylaws interpretation. Do they also apply more generally to the interpretation of rules of order in other documents?

In the case you describe, the session already has a order of business prescribed for it. As a consequence, a two-thirds vote is required in order to adopt an agenda conflicting with this previously adopted order (RONR, 10th ed., p. 360, ll. 20-24).

Thank you.

[Josh Martin]

Do they also apply more generally to the interpretation of rules of order in other documents?

Yes. The Principles of Interpretation for Bylaws "have equal application to other rules and documents adopted by an organization." (RONR, 10th ed., pg. 570, lines 12-14) Additionally, the particular principle of "specific trumps general" is mentioned earlier in the text as a guideline for interpreting RONR. (RONR, 10th ed., pg. 19, line 9 - pg. 20, line 2)

[Gary Novosielski]

Yes, a specific rule in a set of bylaws trumps a general rule in a set of bylaws, if both are already "on the books".

But if a specific rule that has not yet been adopted, e.g., an as yet unapproved agenda with Special Orders, conflicts, because of the specific time requirements, with a general rule (the standard order of business) that has been previously adopted, then the new conflicting rule would require a 2/3 vote.