Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Point of order?


Guest Kevin

Recommended Posts

At a recent meeting, a vote was taken to amend the bylaws which removed the voting privilege of ex-officio members. The motion passed unanimously. None of the ex-officio members were present at the meeting, but have since made it known that they consider the vote not to be legitimate because, in their opinion, proper notification was not given. It is the president's opinion (and the vice president's, who chaired the meeting)that proper notification in writing was given as per the organization's bylaws. What course of action, if any, do these ex-officio members have in order to get their vote back? My opinion is that it is too late to raise a point of order and the point would not be taken by the president if it were raised. The only option I see is that they would have to lobby the voting members and convince them to make a motion and vote for an amendment to the bylaws in order to retore their voting privileges since they can no longer vote. Is this correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>> they consider the vote not to be legitimate because, in their opinion, proper notification was not given. It is the president's opinion (and the vice president's, who chaired the meeting)that proper notification in writing was given as per the organization's bylaws <<

Why is there so much 'opinion' on this question? Is required notice not clearly defined in the bylaws? If it is clearly defined, do the parties simply disagree about the facts of what was done? Were the ex officio members left out when notice was sent??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The constitution states, "The constitution may be changed or amended by a two-thirds majority vote of the members voting at any meeting provided written notice of the proposed change or amendment is mailed to the members at least 7 days prior to the meeting." The letter was sent out in a timely fashion to all members, including the ex-officio members. The notification stated, "The constitution review committee will make a report and make motions for the Council’s consideration pertaining to Constitution Articles IV,VI, VII, XVI, and Bylaws Article II." The ex-officio members are saying that the notice to the members must include any proposed motions verbatum and may not be changed at the meeting. They say that if the amendment motions are changed in any way, they cannot be voted on until the next meeting, too. The president says they are reading too much into their interpretation of what constitutes proper notification.

Just to be fully informed, what would be the proper procedure if the vote taken was determined to be out of order? Is it still too late to bring the point of order? Would the passing of the amendments need to be declared null and void. If so, at what point would the ex-officio members regain their voting rights?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ex-officio members are saying that the notice to the members must include any proposed motions verbatum and may not be changed at the meeting. They say that if the amendment motions are changed in any way, they cannot be voted on until the next meeting, too.

They are right in the first instance but not in the second. Changes to the proposed amendment(s) are permitted as long as they fall within "the scope of the notice".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be fully informed, what would be the proper procedure if the vote taken was determined to be out of order? Is it still too late to bring the point of order? Would the passing of the amendments need to be declared null and void. If so, at what point would the ex-officio members regain their voting rights?

Agreeing with Mr. Mountcastle, a Point of Order can be made without regard to the normal timeliness requirements based on RONR p. 244(a) because the Constitution says "The constitution may be changed or amended by a two-thirds majority vote of the members voting at any meeting provided written notice of the proposed change or amendment is mailed to the members at least 7 days prior to the meeting." and the notice was inadequate. This would need to be done by a member (I think an ex officio member could do it as well since only the right to vote was removed).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Thomas J. Balch

"Unless the rules require the full text of the . . . bylaw amendment to be submitted in the notice, only the purport need be indicated; but such a statement of purport must be accurate and complete--as in 'to raise the annual dues to $20'--since it will determine what amendments are in order when the motion is considered. The notice becomes invalid if the motion is amended beyond the scope of the notice." RONR (10th ed.), p. 117, l. 6-13.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of the ex-officio members were present at the meeting, but have since made it known that they consider the vote not to be legitimate because, in their opinion, proper notification was not given. It is the president's opinion (and the vice president's, who chaired the meeting) that proper notification in writing was given as per the organization's bylaws. What course of action, if any, do these ex-officio members have in order to get their vote back?

Review:

• "because proper notification was not given."

• "It is the president's opinion that proper notification in writing was given as per the organization's bylaws."

So, you are saying:

• Party P1 asserts that notice was not adequate.

• Party P2 asserts that notice was adequate.

Where there is a doubt about whether adequate notice was given, then organization will have to decide.

• A point of order must be raised.

• The point of order will be ruled on by the chair, or ruled on by the assembly.

• An appeal will likely follow.

• The result of the appeal makes the decision final, either way.

It is not appropriate to make a motion to rescind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... a Point of Order can be made without regard to the normal timeliness requirements based on RONR p. 244(a) because the Constitution says "The constitution may be changed or amended by a two-thirds majority vote of the members voting at any meeting provided written notice of the proposed change or amendment is mailed to the members at least 7 days prior to the meeting." and the notice was inadequate...

Isn't this a violation of the rights of absentees issue (bad notice), not a p. 244(a) issue?

If not (and after the discussion we had in the 'motion out of order' thread as well), I really have to go back to the drawing board on my understanding of what 244(a) means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't this a violation of the rights of absentees issue (bad notice), not a p. 244(a) issue?

It might be that as well. My thought was that the members did receive notice that amendments would be considered so absentee rights weren't violated exactly. However, the bylaws require more details then just saying which articles will be targeted which leads me to p. 244(a). But I could be off base (won't be the first time).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't this a violation of the rights of absentees issue (bad notice), not a p. 244(a) issue?

If not (and after the discussion we had in the 'motion out of order' thread as well), I really have to go back to the drawing board on my understanding of what 244(a) means.

In this case, there is a question is this really was adequate notice; the bylow did not require the "full text."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this case, there is a question if this really was adequate notice; the bylow did not require the "full text."

Well, the bylaws do require "written notice of the proposed change or amendment". Whether that falls on the weak "purport" end of the spectrum or the strong "verbatim" end is up to this organization to determine. But you'll never go wrong with verbatim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, let's say at the next meeting the point of order is raised. The chair does not take the point of order and the point is appealed. Do the ex-officio members that lost their vote by the passed amendment have the right to vote on the apeal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, let's say at the next meeting the point of order is raised. The chair does not take the point of order and the point is appealed. Do the ex-officio members that lost their vote by the passed amendment have the right to vote on the apeal?

No. So the ex officio members need to make sure they get all of their voting member buddies to attend the meeting where the Point of Order is to be raised and to vote on the Appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the bylaws do require "written notice of the proposed change or amendment". Whether that falls on the weak "purport" end of the spectrum or the strong "verbatim" end is up to this organization to determine. But you'll never go wrong with verbatim.

You do do not necessarily make a mistake when it is not verbatim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...