Suspending Rules (again)

[tctheatc]

It states in our bylaws that the Annual Meeting shall take place immediately following the worship service on the 1st Sunday in March.

Now, that statement does not refer to parliamentary procedure, so is it a standing rule? As such can it be suspended by a majority vote? (RONR uses the time of the meeting as an example, but not the day, so I have a sneaking suspicion I'm at a stumbling block in my understanding AGAIN!)

Or is it a rule of order, and suspendable by a 2/3 vote?

There is part of me thinking it is neither, and it is not suspendable. It is a bylaw and changing the date of the annual meeting could prohibit members from attending. Whereas it involves member's rights to attend, it cannot be suspended.

OK, tell me if I'm all wet, and why.

And if this is NOT a rule of order, why the time of the meeting is, but the date is not.

[George Mervosh]

In my view, it's no different than having a meeting starting clock time in the bylaws, which is not a procedural rule, therefore not suspendable.

[David A Foulkes]

My thinking is that you can't suspend any rule outside of a meeting anyway. In order to change the date of the meeting (assuming that is the point of your question), you'd need to amend your bylaws. Second best option is call it to order and then create an adjourned meeting to a different date.

[tctheatc]

In my view, it's no different than having a meeting starting clock time in the bylaws, which is not a procedural rule, therefore not suspendable.

I think I have been misreading p 256 l25 ff. all along and that has been messing me up. I took that to mean the time of the meeting (as a standing rule) was included in the bylaws. I see now that's not what it refers to. It refers to standing rules contained in their own section. For whatever reason, the way your reply was worded made that click. Looking at it now seems so painfully obvious. Duh.

Thanks!

[Kim Goldsworthy]

It states in our bylaws that the Annual Meeting shall take place immediately following the worship service on the 1st Sunday in March.

Now, that statement does not refer to parliamentary procedure, so is it a standing rule?

No, it isn't a standing rule. You just said it is "in our bylaws." So it is a BYLAW.

Had it been an adopted resolution (e.g., "Resolved, That all our AGMs be held the first Sunday in March") then that would have been a STANDING RULE.

It cannot be suspended.

Why not?

• It is not a rule of order occurring (i.e., triggered) inside a meeting.

(You can suspend a standing rule occurring inside a meeting.)

(Suspensions end at adjournment, no matter what; so if you attempted to suspend such a rule, upon adjournment, you'd have to meet "the first Sunday in March" as the rule springs back to life, when the gavel hits the sounding block. -- "Wham!")

[tctheatc]

Yes. I should've phrased my question(s) with "is it in the nature of...."

I swear, I'll get it one of these days!

[Josh Martin]

Now, that statement does not refer to parliamentary procedure, so is it a standing rule?

No. It is not in the nature of a rule of order, if that is what you're asking. It is not suspendable.

As such can it be suspended by a majority vote?

No. Rules in Bylaws which are in the nature of rules of order may be suspended by a 2/3 vote. Other rules in the Bylaws may not be suspended at all unless the Bylaws provide for their suspension.

Or is it a rule of order, and suspendable by a 2/3 vote?

No.

There is part of me thinking it is neither, and it is not suspendable. It is a bylaw and changing the date of the annual meeting could prohibit members from attending. Whereas it involves member's rights to attend, it cannot be suspended.

You've got it. The rule cannot be suspended, although the members at the meeting could Adjourn the meeting to a later date. There is no method to move the meeting to an earlier date without amending the Bylaws.

And if this is NOT a rule of order, why the time of the meeting is, but the date is not.

But the time of the meeting isn't a rule of order.