Challenging my clubs Parliamentarian

[lipets]

I am on a special committee doing a Revision of the Bylaws specifically the Constitution, we completed our work and it will go out to the members for review then a delegates meeting to be debated and voted upon Article by Article.

Reading p. 575-576 I read that each article as adopted or voted upon (by a 2/3 majority according to our current amendment Article) becomes a part of the bylaws immediately.

Our club Parliamentarian and I are disputing the following issue;

He says each Article voted upon does not go into effect until the very end of voting on each Article,

at which time the whole Constitution must go thru another overall vote before it becomes effective.

There is nothing in our current Bylaws amendment articles stating anything other than "Amendments to this Constitution may also be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the members represented by Delegates "

I believe he's incorrect, what do you think?

.............

If he can't be convinved to alter his interpetation how and when could it be formally challenged.

tks

[Larry Cisar]

I am on a special committee doing a Revision of the Bylaws specifically the Constitution, we completed our work and it will go out to the members for review then a delegates meeting to be debated and voted upon Article by Article.

Reading p. 575-576 I read that each article as adopted or voted upon (by a 2/3 majority according to our current amendment Article) becomes a part of the bylaws immediately.

Our club Parliamentarian and I are disputing the following issue;

He says each Article voted upon does not go into effect until the very end of voting on each Article,

at which time the whole Constitution must go thru another overall vote before it becomes effective.

There is nothing in our current Bylaws amendment articles stating anything other than "Amendments to this Constitution may also be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the members represented by Delegates "

I believe he's incorrect, what do you think?

.............

If he can't be convinved to alter his interpetation how and when could it be formally challenged.

tks

You're correct if you are going to do it item by item. Probably better for you is to do it as a revision. Each proposed change is presented, amended, and approved for the final vote either by majority vote or unanimous consent. Then on the final entire document, you vote using the voting requirement of your bylaws.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

I am on a special committee doing a Revision of the Bylaws specifically the Constitution, we completed our work and it will go out to the members for review then a delegates meeting to be debated and voted upon Article by Article.

Reading p. 575-576 I read that each article as adopted or voted upon (by a 2/3 majority according to our current amendment Article) becomes a part of the bylaws immediately.

Our club Parliamentarian and I are disputing the following issue;

He says each Article voted upon does not go into effect

until the very end of voting on each Article;

at which time the whole Constitution must go thru another overall vote before it becomes effective.

There is nothing in our current Bylaws amendment articles stating anything other than "Amendments to this Constitution may also be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the members represented by Delegates "

I believe he's incorrect, what do you think?

You two are speaking past each other.

You are both right.

But you are not talking about the same parliamentary subject.

• Your parliamentarian is correct if he is describing the seriatim format of doing a revision of one's constitution/bylaws.

You go through each article, perfect that one article, and move on to the next article where you repeat the process.

Once you complete a pass through, the whole document is opened up, i.e., you no longer follow the seriatim flow of debate/amendment.

Then you vote on the entire revision.

That is, each article, once you are done perfecting it, IS NOT VOTED ON AS AN AMENDMENT, AT THAT TIME.

(You are voting on amendments to that section, only, and not as an amendment to the constitution/bylaws.)

You are to vote on the whole thing, after every section has been individually fine-tuned.

• You are correct if you are describing doing each amendment individually.

IF you not doing a revision, and

IF you are not doing the seriatim process,

THEN you vote on each individual amendment, and each affirmative vote truly, and instantly, amends the constitution/bylaws.

Now, you two have to come to a decision as to WHAT YOU ARE DOING.

Are you doing a

revision

?

Are you doing your amendments

seriatim

?

Are you doing your amendments

individually

?

[David A Foulkes]

I am on a special committee doing a Revision of the Bylaws

So, are you actually doing a revision? Or did you just use that term loosely to describe the process?

[lipets]

Now, you two have to come to a decision as to WHAT YOU ARE DOING.

Are you doing a

revision

?

Are you doing your amendments

seriatim

?

Are you doing your amendments

individually

?

Yes it's a Revision

Yes he says it's going to be seriatim,

So, are you actually doing a revision? Or did you just use that term loosely to describe the process?

We changed it as a revision, it is 95% changed, the committee went thru a 50 year old document and re wrote it.

tks

[Dan Honemann]

Yes it's a Revision

Yes he says it's going to be seriatim,

Then perhaps both you and your parliamentarian should carefully review Section 28 (especially pp. 268-69).

[Gary Novosielski]

Our club Parliamentarian and I are disputing the following issue;

He says each Article voted upon does not go into effect until the very end of voting on each Article,

at which time the whole Constitution must go thru another overall vote before it becomes effective.

Your parliamentarian is mostly correct, if you're really doing a full revision.

RONR says (p. 268, l. 8):

In adopting a set of bylaws... consideration by paragraph is the normal 
and advisable procedure, followed as a matter of course unless the assembly votes to do otherwise.

The reason for this is stated at the top of that same page:

Keeping all subdivisions of the series open until one final vote avoids the possibility of 
complications which would result--especially in the case of bylaws--if amendments to later 
paragraphs necessitated changes in others that had already been adopted.

To answer your question, if you don't want it done this way, you can move "that it be considered as a whole". This makes the whole document open for amendment at once, but it will be harder to keep track of that way.

But those are basically your two choices. In the case of a complete bylaws revision, it would not be proper to attempt to pass each article one at a time, when they were written to perform as a complete document.

You said you were relying on 575 for you argument, but you should re-read line 14, where it clearly says that the entire revision must be accepted or rejected (after appropriately perfecting it), so that the old document is either retained intact, or completely replaced. It cannot be partially altered.

[David A Foulkes]

Your parliamentarian is mostly correct, if you're really doing a full revision.

RONR says (p. 268, l. 8):

In adopting a set of bylaws... consideration by paragraph is the normal 
and advisable procedure, followed as a matter of course unless the assembly votes to do otherwise.

The reason for this is stated at the top of that same page:

Keeping all subdivisions of the series open until one final vote avoids the possibility of 
complications which would result--especially in the case of bylaws--if amendments to later 
paragraphs necessitated changes in others that had already been adopted.

And of course, this can still be a problem even when considered seriatim, if you aren't paying attention. An amendment to Article 85 Section 42 sub-Section 18(f) can still throw a curve at Article 1 Section 1 from three hours earlier. The advantage to considering by paragraph is that, if someone wisely points out that Article 1 now needs additional attention to bring it in line with 85-42-18(f), it is still available for amendment. If it goes unnoticed at the time of final vote, you would now have a conflict in the bylaws. Careful attention is still the key.