Guest lackey Posted February 23, 2011 at 07:30 PM Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 at 07:30 PM We are a religious organization voting on a revision to our constitution affecting the "beliefs" to which members must agree. Are all current members required to sign the revised constitution in order to maintain their membership? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted February 23, 2011 at 07:54 PM Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 at 07:54 PM We are a religious organization voting on a revision to our constitution affecting the "beliefs" to which members must agree. Are all current members required to sign the revised constitution in order to maintain their membership?Nothing in RONR requires this. Any superior rules you all have may say otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Goldsworthy Posted February 23, 2011 at 08:02 PM Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 at 08:02 PM We are a religious organization voting on a revision to our constitution affecting the "beliefs" to which members must agree. Are all current members required to sign the revised constitution in order to maintain their membership?"Sign"?No.Robert's Rules of Order is clear. -- Amending one's bylaws or one's constitution never requires that 100% of the members AGREE with the amendment(s).There is no extra signing, just because a new amendment was adopted.The amendment process only ensures that ENOUGH members agree with the amendments.In fact:Those who disagree may well begin to lobby for another amendment, to "fix" the new "problem."If they are successful in overturning the latest amendment, the old cohort need not sign anything again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted February 23, 2011 at 08:19 PM Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 at 08:19 PM We are a religious organization voting on a revision to our constitution affecting the "beliefs" to which members must agree. Are all current members required to sign the revised constitution in order to maintain their membership?There's no requirement that anybody sign anything for it to be binding.However, if you decide to change the criteria for membership, and as a result some of your current members would no longer qualify to be admitted to membership, you are going to have to figure out how to handle that, with respect to members you already have. Whatever rules apply to eligibility to acquire or maintain membership must be included in your bylaws or constitution.Does the bylaws constitution currently have any provisions for removing members based on the beliefs to which they do, or do not, or did, or no longer, subscribe? If you are voting to revise the constitution, I hope you are also including rules to cover that situation. If not, then we can't really offer you any help except to wish you luck, and refer you to Chapter XX on disciplinary procedures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted February 23, 2011 at 09:06 PM Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 at 09:06 PM We are a religious organization voting on a revision to our constitution affecting the "beliefs" to which members must agree. Are all current members required to sign the revised constitution in order to maintain their membership?I think this is an ecclesiological question rather than parliamentary. You have to decide as a religious group what level of dissent in beliefs you are willing to tolerate and still call one another member/brother/etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted February 23, 2011 at 11:32 PM Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 at 11:32 PM You have to decide as a religious group what level of dissent in beliefs you are willing to tolerate and still call one another member/brother/etc...The salient point from the perspective of parliamentary law is that if the organization wishes to make signing the Constitution a requirement of membership, such a requirement would need to be in the Constitution itself. Whether such a requirement is desirable is indeed a decision for the organization to make for itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lackey Posted February 24, 2011 at 01:28 PM Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 at 01:28 PM The salient point from the perspective of parliamentary law is that if the organization wishes to make signing the Constitution a requirement of membership, such a requirement would need to be in the Constitution itself. Whether such a requirement is desirable is indeed a decision for the organization to make for itself.In this case, both the preamble of the constitution and the membership section of the constitution say "members must indicate their agreement with the statement of faith contained in the constitution". The goal of making the change was to be more inclusive. Anyone who agreed with the original statement would be included by the new one. Does this new information help answer the question of if the new statement of faith is passed, do the old members have to sign on to the new constitution to remain members? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lackey Posted February 24, 2011 at 01:37 PM Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 at 01:37 PM One more thing, in the requirements for membership section it says "those seeking to become members must sign the statement of faith contained in the constitution". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted February 24, 2011 at 01:48 PM Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 at 01:48 PM In re your 8:28 question:Looks to me that you are going to have to define precisely what you mean by "indicate their agreement with...".In re 8:37:Looks like "indicate their agreement..." is defined reasonably clearly for new members; what about the current members?As ever, bylaws interpretation , in the last analysis, is up to your association, not us on the I'net. See p. 570 ff. in RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Goldsworthy Posted February 24, 2011 at 05:41 PM Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 at 05:41 PM In this case, both the preamble of the constitution and the membership section of the constitution say"members must indicate their agreement with the statement of faith contained in the constitution". What does this mean?Does this mean(a.) when joining the organization the first time?(b.) when renewing membership via the payment of annual dues?(c.) constantly, daily, 24/7?(d.) as judged by others?(e.) by one's works?The rule you cited makes no mention of "signing" anything.Nor does your rule say that "agreement" must be done regularly, or steadily, or constantly.The goal of making the change was to be more inclusive.Anyone who agreed with the original statement would be included by the new one. OK. Soundly nicely democratic.Does this new information help answer the question of if the new statement of faith is passed, do the old members have to sign on to the new constitution to remain members?No. I have NO IDEA where you got the idea that any kind of SIGNING is involved at all.Nothing in Robert's Rules requires signing.Nothing in your constitution requires signing.In fact, nothing in your constitution suggests that any kind re-agreement (i.e., to affirm belief again and again and again, ad infinitum) is ever necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted February 24, 2011 at 09:53 PM Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 at 09:53 PM Does this new information help answer the question of if the new statement of faith is passed, do the old members have to sign on to the new constitution to remain members?Nope. I said it would have to be required by your Constitution. Whether your Constitution does require it is a question your association will have to interpret. See RONR, 10th ed., pgs. 570-573 for some Principles of Interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.