general/special orders vs. new business

[Tom Coronite]

Background: our church has its annual meeting Feb 1 and the bylaws stipulate that at this meeting we are to elect officers and board/committee members.  Also in our bylaws is the charge to elect a search committee (to find a candidate to replace the outgoing pastor) which is a special committee.

 

My question goes to the point of priority.  This is not a special meeting and the election of the search committee is not the special order for the meeting. Are both these items general orders (because they are in the bylaws) and we would decide in which order to take them (as there really is no "order in which they were made" )?  Or are they both simply brought up under new business (assuming the standard order of business is being used) and whichever is brought up 1st is dealt with 1st?

[Hieu H. Huynh]

"Matters that the bylaws require to be considered at a particular meeting, such as the nomination and election of officers, may be regarded as special orders for the meeting and be considered under the heading of Special Orders in the order of business." (RONR 11th ed., p. 357, ll. 27-31)

[Dan Honemann]

The election of officers and board members may be considered to be special orders of business at your annual meeting, but I'm not so sure about the formation of a search committee. I assume this provision in the bylaws doesn't require the creation of such a special committee to be considered at a particular meeting, but only when and if the need arises.

 

I suppose the exact language in the bylaws may make a difference in this regard.

[Tom Coronite]

Perhaps, then, I am misunderstanding the reference Mr. Huynh provided, which I had looked at when I was forming this question. "May be regarded.." suggests to me it is not automatically a special order but could be designated as such by the assembly, as described on p 366.  Am I correct to understand that the bylaws themselves make the election of officers and board members a special order?  And Mr. Honemann's point is well taken; the bylaws do not specify the special search committee be selected at a particular meeting.  Therefore that particular committee's election should come up under new business, I think, because it is not necessary it be accomplished Feb 1.  Do I have this right?

[Hieu H. Huynh]

Is there a substantial amount of business to be done at your annual meeting? Setting items of business as special orders ensures that they get consideration before any new business. Also, I think it would be beneficial to have elections earlier in the meeting so that any additional balloting could be completed at the meeting if necessary.

[Tom Coronite]

I agree.  It's not a practical question of how best to conduct the business at the meeting, but rather an academic one of how items become special orders. 

[Richard Brown]

I agree.  It's not a practical question of how best to conduct the business at the meeting, but rather an academic one of how items become special orders. 

I'm intrigued by 1st Church's question and the interpretation of the quoted passage from RONR, too.   The quoted passage says items required by the bylaws to be done at a certain meeting "may" be regarded as special orders.... not that they "are" automatically special orders.

[Josh Martin]

Perhaps, then, I am misunderstanding the reference Mr. Huynh provided, which I had looked at when I was forming this question. "May be regarded.." suggests to me it is not automatically a special order but could be designated as such by the assembly, as described on p 366.  Am I correct to understand that the bylaws themselves make the election of officers and board members a special order?

 

It is my understanding that if an assembly uses the standard order of business in RONR, items of business which the bylaws require to be considered at a particular meeting are automatically treated as special orders for that meeting.

 

And Mr. Honemann's point is well taken; the bylaws do not specify the special search committee be selected at a particular meeting.  Therefore that particular committee's election should come up under new business, I think, because it is not necessary it be accomplished Feb 1.  Do I have this right?

 

Because the bylaws do not specify that the search committee shall be selected at a particular meeting, the rule on pg. 357 does not apply, and the general rules on this subject are controlling. So yes, I suppose that if this is not part of a report and it is not otherwise made an order of the day, then a member will need to make an appropriate motion during New Business.

 

I'm intrigued by 1st Church's question and the interpretation of the quoted passage from RONR, too.   The quoted passage says items required by the bylaws to be done at a certain meeting "may" be regarded as special orders.... not that they "are" automatically special orders.

 

If this is all that was meant, however, then it wouldn't seem necessary to include the language at all, since any item of business may be made a special order. I believe the unusual word choice is due to the fact that this process is very different from how items of business generally become special orders (as described on pg. 365), hence why the text says that they may be regarded as special orders rather than saying that they are special orders.

[Tom Coronite]

 I believe the unusual word choice is due to the fact that this process is very different from how items of business generally become special orders (as described on pg. 365), hence why the text says that they may be regarded as special orders rather than saying that they are special orders.

 

 

That's very helpful, Josh.  Thank you.