ptc122

HOW LONG CAN A MOTION BE HELD IN COMMITTEE IN VIEW OF RULES AGAINST POSTPONING ACTIONS BEYOND THE NEXT MEETING? WHAT PAGES TO STUDY TO DETERMINE WHAT HAPPENS TO A MOTION WHEN REFERRED TO A COMMITTEE? RATHER THAN POSTPONED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING. HOW LONG, ACCORDING TO ROBERTS, CAN A MOTION BE HELD BY A COMMITTEE WITHOUT REPORTING BACK TO THE BOARD WHO REFERRED IT. PAUL

Then you can tell me where in RONR it is stated that the requirement in a bylaw of a 2/3 vote is rule of order. Not an attempt to resurrect, just to obtain some clarity as to why a requirement in a bylaw, on amending bylaws, is interpreted as a rule of order?Pages 15 and 17 are about rules of order but do not state that a 2/3 vote is one. Or if a 2/3 remains a rule of order when placed within a bylaw. The page references do not clarify that a requirement of a 2/3 vote for amending bylaws is a rule of order. What pages do? What if an organization has a separate list of rules of order, and the 2/3 requirement to amend bylaws is not listed? I appreciate how much work goes into deliberating this subject, and the feedback. Paul

"There is no doubt that a rule requiring a 2/3 vote is a rule in the nature of a rule of order". Which pages in RONR or RONRIB would confirm this? I cannot find any. Specifically: RONR p. 588 suggests the wording in a bylaw lines 10 - 16. If an organization adopts same wording and places them in its bylaws, what causes it to be interpreted as a rule of order? Isn't a rule of order contained in the bylaws supposed to be identified? And have requirements for its own suspension?

Good discussion. I think it is determined that previous notice and a 2/3 vote is needed to amend a by-law. And this amendment should have been done with a 2/3 vote. Continuing Breach is a question that may require lawyer's interpretations. We could correct something that was improper by Rescind or Amend. I have gathered several page references to this if anyone would like them. Paul

It is a good question. It is a body that can make decisions and has it's on Bylaws. There is a superior body that could change the results, but they could be changed by the body that performed the improper amendment. Even if it does not fall under P 251 a continuing breach, which makes it automatically null and void, they could change through Rescind or Amend.

It was a motion to change (amend) an existing bylaw. To amend a bylaw requires a 2/3 vote. The amendment was passed without a 2/3 vote. I cannot find anything in RONR that supports a majority being sufficient but I can find several pages that support 2/3 and our own bylaw uses 2/3 (not majority of membership). Thanks for input and RONR pages would be helpful. Paul

The problem is that the vote taken was not 2/3. Are you saying that if previous notice given then NOT having a 2/3 vote is not a breach? The main problem with the vote to amend a by-law was not as per the RULE that previous notice AND a 2/3 vote is needed. Thanks for the quick response and page reference. Paul

We changed a by-law and thought that a majority would suffice. Or we may have changed it without knowing that what we were passing affected that by-law. We used the same by-law title so we know the changes affected the wording. It also affected members as their positions and locations changed. Is majority ever sufficient? (we do not use RONR's majority of entire membership, our Rules By-Law reads: Previous notice and 2/3 vote. Does it become a continuing breach? And how do we undo it. Paul