Wright Stuff

A regular poster offered this comment in a prior post: "Further, the general rule says that you obey your bylaws, and repair your mistakes in the fairest way possible." Where in RONR is the directive to "repair your mistakes in the fairest way possible?" While it only makes sense to follow that path, I have not seen this general rule articulated in the book.

Are you saying one motion is sufficient? If not, what is the second (or first) motion? You wrote only one “I move…” There are two votes: One to allow the motion and one to adopt it.

@Josh Martin As always, your input is well reasoned and, as I recall, is close to the answer the propounder of an amendment was given last year. I’m not convinced as to what the drafters intended, and I’m having trouble imagining the procedure. Assume the 1,000 copy threshold has been met. That’s easy. What does the motion sound like to introduce the amendment? “I move that we amend the Bylaws as detailed in the 1,000 copies that were made available?” If that motion passes with a 2/3 vote, there has to be a subsequent motion, “I move that we amend the Bylaws as detailed in the 1,000 copies that were made available?” At some point, the delegation has to hear the substance of the motion to decide if they want to hear it. Then they have to hear the substance of the motion (again) to decide whether to adopt it. There are similar problems with the drafting of the other provisions, but those can wait for another time. Understand that interpretations of these provisions are being made by people who didn’t write them, one of whom, at a Bylaws Committee meeting, said to me, “I don’t know why you keep bringing up Robert’s Rules since they have nothing to do with our bylaws.” Remember that the bylaws designate RONR as their parliamentary authority. I may be on the committee again this year. It will be a wild time.

Sorry about that. I’ve worked hard for the last 30 years to write for clarity. It’s hard to do when there is no absolute authority on what is correct. You can disagree with my assessment, and I couldn’t argue with you as each of us could find enough authority to make our point. I just finished the four-page thread from September or October on committees suspending rules. It’s fascinating. It’s instructive to see how reasonable minds can differ. The same is true for the English language, I guess.

Yes

It’s grammatically incorrect. I’m sensitive to such things when I may be on the committee responsible for correcting such things.

Of course, but getting back to my original point, moving the Previous Question is not a remedy for the guy who obtains the floor and then consumes the entire ten minutes. It’s a remedy to prevent subsequent speakers from doing the same. I’ve wondered why RONR doesn’t adopt a shorter time that can be lengthened instead of a longer time that needs to be shortened. I’m confident that there’s a good reason. If I’m a member of our bylaws committee next year, I may float the idea of a shorter time period.

You may be surprised how many groups are in the same situation you’re in. As an advocate for compliance with RONR, I am frequently called on to explain why we use rules that are so complicated. In that connection, I’ve learned several things that you may want to consider: Most people are lazy and will not spend the time to learn RONR. Being in leadership does not mean you know the rules even though that knowledge should be a prerequisite. Not everyone has the brain power to learn and apply the rules. If you are the only person who wants an orderly meeting, you will have to win the support of other members to work with you. RONR gives you a tremendous amount of power, but you have to know them, know how to apply them, know how to argue them, and not be concerned about being a trouble maker. Whoever demonstrates true knowledge of RONR in a meeting will gain the respect of the others who also want an orderly meeting. And most important of all, if your meeting is being conducted pursuant to RONR, mistakes are being made even if the chair is an accomplished parliamentarian. If you read this forum very much you will see that, at times, even the authors disagree on the interpretation or application of a provision. Reasonable minds differ. There are tools to deal with problems, such as Appeal. Don’t let the other members of your group discourage you. Take their lack of knowledge as a challenge.

That's my point/question. He can't be interrupted after he obtains the floor, so he can drone on for the full ten minutes. Previous Question limits the ability of OTHER members to speak (unless I'm missing something.)

In the case of the member consuming all ten available minutes, how does move the Previous Question help? The mover has to obtain the floor to make the motion while the long-winded member has the floor.

Here's the rest of the discussion on the topic: "Timing of Amendment The Bylaws may be amended by majority vote of the Delegates present and voting at any State Convention provided, however, that the proposed amendment was mailed to the membership of the State Executive Committee at least thirty days prior to the convening of the State Convention. This mailing requirement shall not apply to the report of the duly appointed Bylaws Committee. Proposed Amendments from Floor of State Convention Amendments from the Convention floor to the proposed amendments to the Bylaws (an amendment to the amendment) which (sic) would materially alter the intent of the original proposed amendment shall not be considered in order unless the propounder of the proposed amendment shall have first furnished a minimum of one thousand (1000) copies of the proposed amendment, and must receive a two-thirds vote of the Delegates present and voting at any State Convention to be approved. This subsection applies only to amendments to amendments to the Bylaws that were mailed out to the Executive Committee as above described." I forgot to mention that the bylaws do designate RONR as their parliamentary authority. Thanks.

Here is an excerpt from the bylaws of an organization of which I am a member: "Proposed amendments (sic) to the bylaws not mailed to the State Executive Committee thirty days prior to the convening of the State Convention shall not be considered in order unless the propounder of the proposed amendment shall have first furnished a minimum of one thousand (1000) copies of the proposed amendment, and it must receive a two-thirds vote of the Delegates present and voting at any State Convention." It must receive a 2/3 vote for what? To be heard by the delegation? To be passed? This language was weaponized last year. It could happen again this year. There is no other language addressing a proposed amendment not mailed to the State Executive Committee thirty days prior to the convening of the State Convention. Common sense would suggest that the provision only makes sense if the amendment must receive a 2/3 vote to adopt. "Mailed" thirty days? Does a postmark count? Must the mail have been received by the Committee thirty days before? The three-day mailbox rule? While the organization is free to interpret its own bad drafting, I would like to know if I'm overlooking something here.

Number 1 is easy. Number 2 is frustrating, particularly the use of “clearly”. It’s not clear to me (yet) how to identify those particular bylaw provisions that are in the nature of a rule of order. I would have thought that changing the voting threshold would be prohibited, but “clearly” it’s not. If you have any suggestions for identifying those provisions, I would love to hear them. If it is a matter of rote memorization, where is the list I can memorize? Thanks.

Assuming the 2/3 vote requirement is in the bylaws, which it is in ours, how can this rule be suspended? I’m looking at the last sentence of 2:21. Two days ago I understood that bylaws can’t be suspended. Now I’m learning that there are exceptions to the rule, but I have yet to find a list of the exceptions.

I thought and hoped this forum was above partisan politics.

I’m asking @Dan Honemann!!!

Is Table II, Motion 3 wrong? If so, what notation should I make in the book?

Great discussion. I’m doing my best to absorb it all.

Watching. I would have said it’s too late. My understanding is that RONR does not prevent the body from doing stupid things if they so choose.

Your contributions are always very helpful. I think not rounding up the threshold is what I was not understanding. Thank you.

Can you explain further? I’m trying to understand “has no relevance in determining quorum…”. Maybe I’m confused over ”this applies to voting.” What is “this”?

Thank you. That’s very helpful.

Who makes the decision? I can’t imagine invoking this provision during a heated meeting. How can it be explained to a body with so many people who don’t know or care about RONR?

I attended (as a guest) a poorly chaired political convention this weekend. There are so many questions that I don't know where to start. RONR is the parliamentary authority, and their Plan of Organization does not directly speak to these issues. There was a three-way race for chair. The top two vote getters tied, so they dropped the third one and voted again. Was that the correct approach, or should they have voted for all three again? The chair ejected (invited) guests from the room because they were "too noisy". The noise was actually coming from delegates. A lot of guests left very angry. There were several appeals of the decision of the chair. The chair never responded in the proper fashion although he did attempt to address the problems. Presumably there should have been a point of order. There were some disagreements over credentialing, so those ballots were marked as Provisional. I can't find any references to Provisional ballots in any of the governing documents. (The votes were ultimately not counted because the voters were not eligible to vote.) Occasionally people will come here and opine that RONR is too complicated for many organizations. Seeing how many missed opportunities to bring the chair in line, I wonder what the solution is when nobody, including the chair, can be bothered to study RONR. I've been doing it for three or four years, and I still learn something important every time I pick up the book.

I found one in the back of RONR. Sorry, I should have looked there first. (I thought I had.)