RR Novice in Training

Our bylaws only allow for nomination for office positions from the floor

In our Chapter the Vice President is in charge of bringing in new members. As such, she serve as the Chair of the Membership Committee, which per our bylaws is granted the power to "implement membership recruitment and retention activities." Our Committee, due a point of order hasn't met in months. The Chair, absent any discussions with the committee or formally through vote by the chapter, has been scheduling Membership Activities and has declared that she on her own is planning to make a recommendation to the chapter to bring in new members in the Spring. Is this proper? RR 51:1-2 seems clear that this recommendation must come from the committee and not an individual, even if she is the Chair of the Membership Committee. Is this correct? Or can a Chair operate completely outside of the committee and make their own recommendations. I have seen RR 48:19 that discusses Executive Reports and the power to make recommendations, but I don't think this applies because her recommendation is stemming solely under the the role assigned to her under the Membership Committee. 48:19 – Reports of Executive Officers: In addition to their annual reports, the president and vice-president from time to time may wish or need to report on their activities in connection with administrative duties. Such reports are usually for purposes of information only, but may sometimes contain recommendations calling for action by the assembly. In either case, the reports should generally conform to the rules as to form, substance and disposition that govern committee reports (RR 51). Motions to adopt or implement any recommendations should be made from the floor by a member other than the reporting officer. Can she make this recommendation on her own as an Officer? Can someone else in the chapter make the recommendation from the floor, or would this recommendation need to come from the Committee? Any assistance or guidance in interpretation is appreciated. If this is improper, what steps do I need to take to raise this issue?

Must there still be quroum?

Under the code of conduct when an allegation is logged the individual is placed on "pause" or an injunction of sorts until the investigation is complete. This is under the guidance of the National Constitution. That could be a short time or for a long time, due to the investigation pending.

Groan!!! Thanks

An officer is currently under investigation by the National body. While the investigation is pending he isn't allowed to continue or act in his duties. There is nothing in our bylaws that covers what happens in these situations. I am assuming this would be a temporary vacancy (unless the hearing confirms the allegations and the vacancy is permanent). I have seen rules around vacancies dues to removal or resignation, but nothing that falls within a situation like this. I am assuming that the Vice President who advises the advisors (the role in this question) would assume the responsibilities in the interim but I am trying to confirm whether RR speaks to this. Unfortunately the group is being told that all activities are on hold until the investigation is complete, I don't believe that is in proper order.

Under the Membership Committee clause it states: Section 6. The Membership Committee is composed of 10 persons and is chaired by the Vice President. The Membership Committee is responsible for recruitment and retention activities for the [edited name] Chapter and for implementing the Membership Intake program.

Thank you so much for your response and adding in 50:21. I was told that if I trying to schedule a meeting with the Committee apart of the Chair I could face discipline. That definitely helps

In our Chapter Bylaws, The Vice President, is named as the Chair of the Membership Committee. Our Bylaws state as follows under her role "the Vice President shall: Serve as Chair of the Membership Committee. The Membership Committee is responsible for implementing the Membership Intake program, and for recruitment and retention activities." The Vice President in question believes that the decision to bring on new members, because she is the leader of the intake program, is not subject to the say of the Membership Committee and the decision to proceed with bringing in new members doesn't require a recommendation or input from the Membership Committee. That is the only language in our bylaws. There is nothing granting this power and there is nothing saying that she does not have this power. She of course, would prefer to avoid the Committee. My argument is that RR 51:54 makes it clear that when it comes to bringing in new members the Membership Committee is responsible for presenting the list and issuing the formal recommendation to the chapter to review the candidates for membership. 51:54 - Membership and Nominating Committee Reports “When a membership committee reports on names of persons referred to the committee as applicants for society membership, the report can be rendered orally, but a list of the names of the persons recommended for membership should be submitted in writing. When such a report is made, the chair at once states the question on the admission to membership of the candidates recommended by the committee. I want to make sure my interpretation is correct because the Chair of the Membership Committee has cancelled all meetings to prevent the Committee from debating this matter formally. She has stated that her actions aren't "recommendations" that require a vote. Is the Membership Committee right to request that we be allowed to make the recommendation to bring in new members, or can the Chair unilaterally do what she wants? Can the Chair issue a report stating her intent to bring in new members, absent a recommendation being made to the body (RR:48:19)?

Thank you this has been extremely helpful!

Under the section - Principles of Interpretation - it mentions what must happen if the meaning is ambiguous. What qualifies as "ambiguous" or "clear" because that can be subjective.

In the event that attendance at the meeting is low, but quorum is met. Can we suspend a vote to allow time to communicate the potential challenge so there is more vote participation at the next chapter meeting? Of must the vote occur immediately.

Can the vote on the appeal at the local level be escalated through a formal grievance to our Regional Parliamentarian? Or is it absolute

It is both honestly. We only found the proof of the change because a member, who was in the chapter at the time, was able to go back to 2015 in her personal email and find an email confirming the change in an email. In the official Chapter archives however, the Bylaw Amendment or Meeting Minutes for 2015/2016 show no change. So the change to the language makes sense, given the size of the chapter at the time. We are now a chapter well above 30 members....so the condition "not having enough members for each position" is not met. If they try to argue that the clause is ambiguous (which I believe is crazy)- will that require a vote of the membership? Or can I utilize RR 56:68 Principles of Interpretation that "the interpretation should be in accordance with the intention of the society at the time they bylaw was adopted as far as this can be determined"

We did find the documentation for when the bylaw was amended. At the time the chapter only had 10 members.