Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Bylaw changes without questions


Guest NS

Recommended Posts

Notice was given that our PTO bylaws would be changed. After reviewing them I had a few questions and brought them to the meeting to ask however copies of the new bylaws were passed out then immediately voted on without any opportunity to ask questions. Must the organization give an opportunity for members to ask questions and clarification before voting? Also must they provide a document stating the old bylaws and what changes they are making versus just handing us the new ones and assuming we know all the changes they made. My understanding is that one person made the changes to the bylaws and just had the rest of the board review it and sign off in a rushed manner not allowing some to truly review the new bylaws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might be interested in reviewing the section on the steps in handling of a motion, RONR (10th ed.), §4, pp. 31ff. If you are asking about something that happened in a meeting of a small board, you might also want to review the modified procedures for transacting business in a small board, pp. 470, 471.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Mr Elsman implied, in his cheerfully traditionally laconic way, debate on the merits of a proposal are an intrinsic part of the deliberative process. The presiding officer must, must, must, know this, to do his or her job with at least minimal competence.

(But if the chair does not know his job, or otherwise doesn't do it, the membership must insist that proper procedure be followed, to ensure its rights. As the SAC says, "Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom.")

Actually it is strongly recommended that the proposed changes be presented in a format that shows both the original document and the document as it would appear if the changes are adopted. But it's not required by Robert's Rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm tempted to say, "Hey, you got notice, and were allowed to vote, what are ya grumblin' about?" But I won't. Oh, wait........

Anyway, I suspect it's all a little too late now, but this sort of ramrodding through of bylaw changes is veddy veddy bad. As GcT notes, part of being a part of a deliberative assembly is the opportunity to deliberate. It almost merits a "duh", but I'll save that for later. Oh, wait.....

However, another piece of the puzzle you were denied here was the (rightful) opportunity to offer amendments to the amendments, wherein any proposed changes you were not favorable with could be fine-tuned to make everybody (or at least a "2/3 majority") happy.

As GcT notes, your presiding officer should have known how to handle this properly, and should have done so. Why s/he did not should be worrisome to you, and probably a larger portion of the membership. But you should be willing to accept some responsibility for the situation, since you actually have (apparently) a better understanding of the process than your president. I'd suggest getting hands on Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised In Brief (the In Boxer version is delayed at the printers) Second Edition if it's available. And then of course move up to The Book for all the gory details. And take more than a few glances at the sections on Point of Order and Appeal to be ready next time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...