Jenn

A bylaw states a member must attend 9 of 12 meetings to be eligible for an elected office. The unit only had 11 meetings prior to the election. At this juncture, is the bylaw enforceable because the 12 meetings did not occur? If a member has attended 8, could they argue that the meeting canceled impacted their eligibility?

Does RONR reference “member at large”? What is the parliamentary definition for the term? In my limited experience, this classification was assigned to members who were not affiliated with a subordinate unit (chapter) due to geographical constraints. I’ve read bylaws that forbade this classification of membership were local units existed. As I study and learn more, I get the impression that my understanding is incorrect. Please advise and thank you.

When citing RONR, do you wite the line numbers that capture the entire citation (l. 23-27) or the line where the citation begins only (l. 23)?

Got it ! Thanks. I guess I should have said myth in some organizations because I have heard it repeated during different experiences.

Is there a reference in RONR indicating a committee must be composed of an odd number of members/participants, or is this an adopted custom across organizations?

Under an Article titled “Dues and Fees” it states each member will pay the annual chapter dues in full by the end of the year. That’s all. Can a Point of Order be raised because no amount has been agreed upon in the bylaws?

I belong to an organization that does not stipulate the amount of annual dues in the bylaws as outlined in RONR - Article Members. An annual budget is drafted and the Financial Committee recommends the amount for dues under Receivables based on the number of members and obligations the organization must meet to remain financially solvent. The membership votes for the annual budget’s adoption. I have a few questions: 1. Is this considered a special rule of order? Because dues fees relate to business transactions. 2. If this is considered a special rule of order should the budget be adopred by a 2/3 majority? 3. Are there any other RONR references I should review?

Does the entire membership (50 members) need to be present?

A chapter has 50 members and 40 are present at a regular meeting. They want to adopt a special rule without providing notice. If all 40 vote in favor of the adoption, is that in order?

Is there a requirement to document the names of maker AND “seconder” of a motion? What RONR reference should be used?

It is a general question regarding standing rules. It would be a rule regarding an administrative process. No, in this example there would be no existing rule. If there was an existing rule, we would have to use the motion and criteria for amending something previously adopted, correct?

The organization has received recommendations for bylaws changes and disseminated them to the membership in preparation for the annual meeting. One of the recommendations, which will probably be adopted limits the number of elected officers that come from the same geographical area. There are no provisions in the bylaws that delay implementation of the bylaws once adopted and bylaws are voted on during the first plenary on the first day. The nominations committee started their work and it is possible that nominees may come from geographical areas that if elected would conflict with the anticipated bylaws adoption. Elections occur during the last plenary on the last day. Should nominees be determined ineligible if they conflict with newly adopted geographical limits? If so, what RONR reference supports this? Or are nominees allowed to run for office because the call for nominations were sent prior to the bylaws being adopted? If so, what RONR reference supports this?

Is prior notification to the membership required to adopt a new standing rule at a regularly scheduled meeting?

Is there any parliamentary resource to explain the difference between founding and charter members?

Yes, the approval of parent group is required before the bylaws go into effect. That being said, should that (parent group approval) be prefaced to the body before the amendments with the parent group’s edits are disseminated again for a 2/3 vote?