Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Board Powers


ACM

Recommended Posts

We have a matter in our National organization where there is an upcoming Convention and there has been a call for Bylaw Amendments, and my concern is that the Board and the Bylaws Committee have made and seconded motions to change the Bylaws, but rather than doing such as individual members, the Board has submitted motions and seconded motions as "The Board". Further many of these same motions were made by "The Board/Bylaws Committee" and seconded by "The Board/Bylaws Committee".

I believe that individual board members can make a motion and another individual member can second, but can the board --per se-- make and second its own motion? Further can the Bylaws Committee do the same? Can the Bylaws Committee do anything at all, as a whole or as individual members to write or propose motions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a matter in our National organization where there is an upcoming Convention and there has been a call for Bylaw Amendments, and my concern is that the Board and the Bylaws Committee have made and seconded motions to change the Bylaws, but rather than doing such as individual members, the Board has submitted motions and seconded motions as "The Board". Further many of these same motions were made by "The Board/Bylaws Committee" and seconded by "The Board/Bylaws Committee".

I believe that individual board members can make a motion and another individual member can second, but can the board --per se-- make and second its own motion? Further can the Bylaws Committee do the same? Can the Bylaws Committee do anything at all, as a whole or as individual members to write or propose motions?

As far as the procedure in RONR is concerned, the report of a board or committee may recommend the adoption of one or more motions, and if it does, the reporting member should move the adoption of such motion(s) in behalf of the board or committee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as the procedure in RONR is concerned, the report of a board or committee may recommend the adoption of one or more motions, and if it does, the reporting member should move the adoption of such motion(s) in behalf of the board or committee.

Also, if the board or committee contains more than one member (probably a safe bet), the motion does not require a second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Thank you, folks, for sharing your comments but I'm not sure I am getting anywhere just yet.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Our Bylaws do state in a section titled "General Duties" that contains the only direct reference to 'powers' of the board that states: <strong><em>"The Board of Directors shall have general control of the affairs of the Association between biennial national conferences, during which time they shall consider action on conference recommendations."</em></strong></p>

<p> </p>

<p><strong><em>Full text;</em></strong></p>

<p><strong style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 12px; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'Liberation Sans', FreeSans, sans-serif; line-height: 18px; text-align: left; ">§ 4.09 General Duties.</strong></p>

<p><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'Liberation Sans', FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: 18px; text-align: left; ">The Board of Directors shall have general control of the affairs of the Association between biennial national conferences, during which time they shall consider action on conference recommendations. The Board shall undertake actions to ensure the financial health and growth of the Association. The Board shall have the power to fill Board vacancies except for the office of President as they may occur between biennial national conferences, to appropriate money from the operating fund, and to ensure that the current expenditures of the Association shall not at any time exceed the regular income for each fiscal year.</span></p>

<p> </p>

<p>My reading and that of former board members of this definition of powers means that the board cannot make a motion at all, only a recommendation. That recommendation is not a motion and therefore it cannot be seconded.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>My understanding of a 'Bylaws Committee' is that they review proposals as required 60 days prior to the conference and distribute them to the Delegates 30 days prior to the conference with either a recommendation to support or a recommendation to deny. In this capacity they can neither make nor second a motion nor deny a motion as such would be a conflict of interest.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Some things must be seen to be believed but a copy and paste of a section of a motion (with the organization's name fudged as XYZ) looks like this:</p>

<p> </p>

<p>***</p>

<p> </p>

<div>Authored By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee</div>

<div>Seconded By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee</div>

<div>Bylaws Amendment:</div>

<div>ARTICLE FIVE. Meetings. § 5.01 (e) (3) and (5)...</div>

<div>***</div>

<div> </div>

<div>My read of the General Duties as quoted above means that the board cannot do this at all, they can only make a recommendation.</div>

<div> </div>

<div>My general understanding of an entity, for which there seems to be no reference to in RONR, is that neither the Board nor the Committee may make a motion as a whole because that would upset the balance of power and cloak individuals motives. The Board, as such, is an entity that represents --in basic business law-- a person; represents One. The members of the Board make up the Board but do not constitute the Board. Because I, as a member, cannot make a motion and second myself and because other entities under this Association of which I am a member cannot make and second itself either it follows that the Board as such cannot either. Now entity might not be the right word here, but the point should be clear. Assuming my point is clear is not the same as assuming the point is valid.</div>

<div> </div>

<div>In Section 1, p.9 the RONR makes clear that "A board within an organized society... is an instrumentality of the society's full assembly, to which it is subordinate. And to be clear we are an organized society and deliberative body.</div>

<div> </div>

<div>Now am I making sense or am I making sense :-)</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I appear to not have a life so I cleaned it up if anyone wants to take a shot at it (though since ACM is a member it would have been nice if he/she had cleaned it up him or herself).

Thank you, folks, for sharing your comments but I'm not sure I am getting anywhere just yet.

Our Bylaws do state in a section titled;General Duties that contains the only direct reference to 'powers' of the board that states:

The Board of Directors shall have general control of the affairs of the Association between biennial national conferences, during which time they shall consider action on conference recommendations.The Board of Directors shall have general control of the affairs of the Association between biennial national conferences, during which time they shall consider action on conference recommendations. The Board shall undertake actions to ensure the financial health and growth of the Association. The Board shall have the power to fill Board vacancies except for the office of President as they may occur between biennial national conferences, to appropriate money from the operating fund, and to ensure that the current expenditures of the Association shall not at any time exceed the regular income for each fiscal year.

My reading and that of former board members of this definition of powers means that the board cannot make a motion at all, only a recommendation. That recommendation is not a motion and therefore it cannot be seconded.

My understanding of a 'Bylaws Committee' is that they review proposals as required 60 days prior to the conference and distribute them to the Delegates 30 days prior to the conference with either a recommendation to support or a recommendation to deny. In this capacity they can neither make nor second a motion nor deny a motion as such would be a conflict of interest.

Some things must be seen to be believed but a copy and paste of a section of a motion (with the organization's name fudged as XYZ) looks like this:

Authored By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee

Seconded By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee

Bylaws Amendment:

ARTICLE FIVE. Meetings. § 5.01 (e) (3) and (5)...

My read of the General Duties as quoted above means that the board cannot do this at all, they can only make a recommendation.

My general understanding of an entity, for which there seems to be no reference to in RONR, is that neither the Board nor the Committee may make a motion as a whole because that would upset the balance of power and cloak individuals motives. The Board, as such, is an entity that represents --in basic business law-- a person; represents One. The members of the Board make up the Board but do not constitute the Board. Because I, as a member, cannot make a motion and second myself and because other entities under this Association of which I am a member cannot make and second itself either it follows that the Board as such cannot either. Now entity might not be the right word here, but the point should be clear. Assuming my point is clear is not the same as assuming the point is valid. In Section 1, p.9 the RONR makes clear that A board within an organized society... is an instrumentality of the society's full assembly, to which it is subordinate. And to be clear we are an organized society and deliberative body.

Now am I making sense or am I making sense :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I appear to not have a life so I cleaned it up if anyone wants to take a shot at it (though since ACM is a member it would have been nice if he/she had cleaned it up him or herself).

I'm still with Mr. Novosielski on this one. The fact that someone else cleaned up the mess is less than persuasive.

HDETM4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Alec McFarlane

Ladies and Gentlemen

I shall apologize to all of you technophobes who know more than me about technical things as well as RONR matters, I had no intention of adding the HTML tags and I have no idea how they got there or how this works, so do forgive my ignorance. If snide remarks are the only things this forum can come up with maybe I am in the wrong place, but I would like to think that my question has relevance here.

With all due thanks to felinophile for cleaning up my idioticy, I would like to re-post the question and perhaps get some replies from the knowledgeable people here.

My reading and that of former board members of this definition of powers means that the board cannot make a motion at all, only a recommendation. That recommendation is not a motion and therefore it cannot be seconded.

My understanding of a 'Bylaws Committee' is that they review proposals as required 60 days prior to the conference and distribute them to the Delegates 30 days prior to the conference with either a recommendation to support or a recommendation to deny. In this capacity they can neither make nor second a motion nor deny a motion as such would be a conflict of interest.

Some things must be seen to be believed but a copy and paste of a section of a motion (with the organization's name fudged as XYZ) looks like this:

Authored By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee

Seconded By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee

Bylaws Amendment:

ARTICLE FIVE. Meetings. § 5.01 (e) (3) and (5)...

My read of the General Duties as quoted above means that the board cannot do this at all, they can only make a recommendation.

My general understanding of an entity, for which there seems to be no reference to in RONR, is that neither the Board nor the Committee may make a motion as a whole because that would upset the balance of power and cloak individuals motives. The Board, as such, is an entity that represents --in basic business law-- a person; represents One. The members of the Board make up the Board but do not constitute the Board. Because I, as a member, cannot make a motion and second myself and because other entities under this Association of which I am a member cannot make and second itself either it follows that the Board as such cannot either. Now entity might not be the right word here, but the point should be clear. Assuming my point is clear is not the same as assuming the point is valid. In Section 1, p.9 the RONR makes clear that A board within an organized society... is an instrumentality of the society's full assembly, to which it is subordinate. And to be clear we are an organized society and deliberative body.

Now am I making sense or am I making sense :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ladies and Gentlemen

I shall apologize to all of you technophobes who know more than me about technical things as well as RONR matters, I had no intention of adding the HTML tags and I have no idea how they got there or how this works, so do forgive my ignorance. If snide remarks are the only things this forum can come up with maybe I am in the wrong place, but I would like to think that my question has relevance here.

With all due thanks to felinophile for cleaning up my idioticy, I would like to re-post the question and perhaps get some replies from the knowledgeable people here.

My reading and that of former board members of this definition of powers means that the board cannot make a motion at all, only a recommendation. That recommendation is not a motion and therefore it cannot be seconded.

My understanding of a 'Bylaws Committee' is that they review proposals as required 60 days prior to the conference and distribute them to the Delegates 30 days prior to the conference with either a recommendation to support or a recommendation to deny. In this capacity they can neither make nor second a motion nor deny a motion as such would be a conflict of interest.

Some things must be seen to be believed but a copy and paste of a section of a motion (with the organization's name fudged as XYZ) looks like this:

Authored By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee

Seconded By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee

Bylaws Amendment:

ARTICLE FIVE. Meetings. § 5.01 (e) (3) and (5)...

My read of the General Duties as quoted above means that the board cannot do this at all, they can only make a recommendation.

My general understanding of an entity, for which there seems to be no reference to in RONR, is that neither the Board nor the Committee may make a motion as a whole because that would upset the balance of power and cloak individuals motives. The Board, as such, is an entity that represents --in basic business law-- a person; represents One. The members of the Board make up the Board but do not constitute the Board. Because I, as a member, cannot make a motion and second myself and because other entities under this Association of which I am a member cannot make and second itself either it follows that the Board as such cannot either. Now entity might not be the right word here, but the point should be clear. Assuming my point is clear is not the same as assuming the point is valid. In Section 1, p.9 the RONR makes clear that A board within an organized society... is an instrumentality of the society's full assembly, to which it is subordinate. And to be clear we are an organized society and deliberative body.

Now am I making sense or am I making sense :-)

Well, the response in post #3 ought to get you started off in the right direction. Then take a look at Section 51 in RONR (11th ed.), and partcularly page 507, lines lines 4-19.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Members of the board can make and second motions in meetings of the board.

Members of the society can make and second motions in meetings of the society.

Boards are not members of the society. Only human beings are (typically) members of the society. Board members may or may not be members of the society.

So, if the board makes a recommendation in a report to the general assembly, a human being must still make the motion. Typically it would not require a second, for the same reason motions recommended by a committee do not require a second*. But a person must still move them.

__________

* a second indicates that more than one person wishes to discuss the motion. Motions from committees of more than one member must have been reported out by a majority of that committee, which means at least one other person wants to discuss the matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ladies and Gentlemen

I shall apologize to all of you technophobes who know more than me about technical things as well as RONR matters, I had no intention of adding the HTML tags and I have no idea how they got there or how this works, so do forgive my ignorance. If snide remarks are the only things this forum can come up with maybe I am in the wrong place, but I would like to think that my question has relevance here.

I can't (or won't) resist pointing out that those of us who are not technophobes have not received any apology :) .

My reading and that of former board members of this definition of powers means that the board cannot make a motion at all, only a recommendation. That recommendation is not a motion and therefore it cannot be seconded.

My understanding of a 'Bylaws Committee' is that they review proposals as required 60 days prior to the conference and distribute them to the Delegates 30 days prior to the conference with either a recommendation to support or a recommendation to deny. In this capacity they can neither make nor second a motion nor deny a motion as such would be a conflict of interest.

Some things must be seen to be believed but a copy and paste of a section of a motion (with the organization's name fudged as XYZ) looks like this:

Authored By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee

Seconded By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee

Bylaws Amendment:

ARTICLE FIVE. Meetings. § 5.01 (e) (3) and (5)...

My read of the General Duties as quoted above means that the board cannot do this at all, they can only make a recommendation.

My general understanding of an entity, for which there seems to be no reference to in RONR, is that neither the Board nor the Committee may make a motion as a whole because that would upset the balance of power and cloak individuals motives. The Board, as such, is an entity that represents --in basic business law-- a person; represents One. The members of the Board make up the Board but do not constitute the Board. Because I, as a member, cannot make a motion and second myself and because other entities under this Association of which I am a member cannot make and second itself either it follows that the Board as such cannot either. Now entity might not be the right word here, but the point should be clear. Assuming my point is clear is not the same as assuming the point is valid. In Section 1, p.9 the RONR makes clear that A board within an organized society... is an instrumentality of the society's full assembly, to which it is subordinate. And to be clear we are an organized society and deliberative body.

Now am I making sense or am I making sense :-)

I think this has nothing to do with any legal or logical concept of the 'the Board' as an individual actor. The fact is that there is no motion yet, so there is nothing to second. As I understand the facts presented, notice of proposed bylaws amendments has gone out prior to a meeting. It does seem that the choice of language was poor ( "Seconded By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee" ), but notice has been given. At the meeting, someone (an individual member) still needs to actually make the motion before it comes before the assembly.

We have a matter in our National organization where there is an upcoming Convention and there has been a call for Bylaw Amendments, and my concern is that the Board and the Bylaws Committee have made and seconded motions to change the Bylaws, but rather than doing such as individual members, the Board has submitted motions and seconded motions as "The Board". Further many of these same motions were made by "The Board/Bylaws Committee" and seconded by "The Board/Bylaws Committee".

I believe that individual board members can make a motion and another individual member can second, but can the board --per se-- make and second its own motion? Further can the Bylaws Committee do the same? Can the Bylaws Committee do anything at all, as a whole or as individual members to write or propose motions?

Again, no motion has yet been made. Motions are made at meetings. As for what the bylaws committee is allowed to do, check your bylaws or the motion that established the committee. However, the typical job of a bylaws committee is to review the bylaws and to recommend necessary/desirable amendments to the bylaws.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slowly but surely it seems like I am getting somewhere, but first let me apologize to Trina... I don't want to leave anybody out and it seems like I am in the right place after all. There is a lot to read and I haven't yet made my RONR 11th a dog-eared copy, but I am working on it.

Trina appears to have a slightly different answer than the moderator, Dan, does in #3 and #13. As noted below, Article 8 allows for amendments to the Bylaws to be made in advance, it does not however spell out that procedure. The Law Committee also is not mentioned or does not exist anywhere in the Bylaws, and certainly not within any listed standing committees, except for this instance.

Does the language within Article 8 allow for the Board or the Bylaws Committee (which, again, does not exist anywhere in the Bylaws but may have been created by the Board) to make motions, as differentiated from a recommendation, or as Dan suggests in p.507, ll 4-19 that in the absence of specific Bylaw rules the RONR allows that in this instance "No second is required..., since the motion is made on behalf of the board or committee"?

ARTICLE EIGHT. Amendments

§ 8.01 Amendments.

These bylaws may be amended by a two thirds (2/3) vote of the Council of Representatives present and voting at the biennial national conference, provided that amendments are submitted to the Law Committee sixty (60) days prior to the conference, that copies are sent to conference delegates thirty (30) days prior to the conference, and that amendments are read during the conference and acted upon immediately thereafter. Amendments may be enacted only by the Council of Representatives.

§ 8.02 Suspensions.

These bylaws may be suspended for a specific purpose by four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Council of Representatives present and voting.

That members, individuals, can make motions is an agreed upon fact without regard to official position (except as commonly noted), but we are talking about the Board acting in concert, as an "actor" in Trina's use, where no individual is so named as the author, is this still legal as per Dan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My assumption here is that your board is trying to convey that these recommendations have the support of the board and the bylaws committee, and has been somewhat careless in how they phrase this.

I would be curious as to the composition of the bylaws committee - is it composed of all the board members? That might explain why they seem to be merged together in the report. I would also think that perhaps the Law committee is the same as the Bylaws committee, but is doing business as Bylaws rather than Law for clarity.

They did not need to add the "Seconded By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee" line. Frankly, I would suggest you just ignore that, chalk it up to over zealousness, or mention it at the meeting that it didn't need to be seconded in the copies sent to conference delegates.

What we're then left with is Authored By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee - which is not a motion. It is a notification that a particular change the bylaws is being suggested by the board/bylaws committee.

Having recently been a delegate at a provincial association meeting with a number of different resolutions, I can report that in our situation the list of resolutions went out to all members in advance, noted with which member organization proposed them. A number of resolutions came forward from the board, and a number came forward from other member organizations within the provincial organization. One resolutions came forward from a committee which was tasked with that job at the previous meeting. At the actual general meeting, each resolution was presented, and someone was asked to move and second each resolution. The resolution from the committee came forward from that committee, and no seconder was required. While I'm not saying that this organization always gets things correct, I thought this may give you some reassurance as to how it might work at your actual meeting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...There is a lot to read and I haven't yet made my RONR 11th a dog-eared copy, but I am working on it.

A commendable aspiration ... but, dog-ears??

Trina appears to have a slightly different answer than the moderator, Dan, does in #3 and #13.

Mr. McFarlane, I don't see disagreement between what Trina and Mr Honemann have said here, do you? I see only that they're addressing some different aspects.

As noted below, Article 8 allows for amendments to the Bylaws to be made in advance,

I don't think so. I think it merely lays out the procedure for giving Previous Notice (see p. 4 and 121) that the motions will be made.

it does not however spell out that procedure. ....

It doesn't need to. By default, the motion will be handled in the standard way motions are handled, presumably and hopefully as Robert's Rules says.

... Come to think of it, that bylaw provision does seem to prescribe at least one rule. (I say "seems" because I am not, not, going to go interpreting any bylaws I haven't read in their entirety.) The one I see prescribes that "amendments are read during the conference and acted upon immediately thereafter." (Which might bring up a can of worms if the members want to take a 15-minute recess during the debate on an amendment. ... for example.)

Does the language within Article 8 allow for the Board or the Bylaws Committee ... to make motions, as differentiated from a recommendation, or as Dan suggests in p.507, ll 4-19 that in the absence of specific Bylaw rules the RONR allows that in this instance "No second is required..., since the motion is made on behalf of the board or committee"?

ACM, I don't think you're quite getting it. First, Article 8 says nothing about recommendations at all. Forget about recommendations altogether at least until Tuesday, when you, or I at least, will have calmed down somewhat. Second, the thing about "no second is required" refers to a motion made by a member on behalf of a specific group of people, and it's really a very minor point that saves a little time.

(I must add, incidentally, as I read the (dangerously excerpted) bit of your bylaws, I think you have the stuff about recommendations backwards. Not that I think it makes compete sense forwards, either.)

ARTICLE EIGHT. Amendments

...

§ 8.02 Suspensions.

These bylaws may be suspended for a specific purpose by four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Council of Representatives present and voting.

By the way, you can have my opinion, this is hair-raising. Or hair-pulling. Probably both.

... but we are talking about the Board acting in concert, as an "actor" in Trina's use, where no individual is so named as the author, is this still legal as per Dan?

It's not that it's illegal, it's that it doesn't happen, per Robert's Rules. Your Board or your Committee is not standing there at the microphone and reading the proposals in unison like a choir -- one person is. That's why you keep reading in Section 51 (until it hurts, which is soon) and elsewhere, words like "and on behalf of the committee, I move that the amendment be adopted" (see top of p. 515).

Now I'm about to shoot my foot. It might be that your bylaws' Article 8 actually does allow the chair to assume the motion, without anyone moving it in the first place. See p. 518, for example. But Mr. McFarlane, please don't bet on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My assumption here is that your board is trying to convey that these recommendations have the support of the board and the bylaws committee, and has been somewhat careless in how they phrase this. I would be curious as to the composition of the bylaws committee - is it composed of all the board members? That might explain why they seem to be merged together in the report. I would also think that perhaps the Law committee is the same as the Bylaws committee, but is doing business as Bylaws rather than Law for clarity. They did not need to add the "Seconded By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee" line. Frankly, I would suggest you just ignore that, chalk it up to over zealousness, or mention it at the meeting that it didn't need to be seconded in the copies sent to conference delegates. What we're then left with is Authored By: XYZ Board of Directors/Bylaws Committee - which is not a motion. It is a notification that a particular change the bylaws is being suggested by the board/bylaws committee. Having recently been a delegate at a provincial association meeting with a number of different resolutions, I can report that in our situation the list of resolutions went out to all members in advance, noted with which member organization proposed them. A number of resolutions came forward from the board, and a number came forward from other member organizations within the provincial organization. One resolutions came forward from a committee which was tasked with that job at the previous meeting. At the actual general meeting, each resolution was presented, and someone was asked to move and second each resolution. The resolution from the committee came forward from that committee, and no seconder was required. While I'm not saying that this organization always gets things correct, I thought this may give you some reassurance as to how it might work at your actual meeting.

The composition of the Bylaws Committee is an unknown besides the Chair. The assumption as that it is composed of other Board members.

A big part of this whole query is in the fear of abuse of powers, as its being done now these Motions are being sent out as a done deal. I am mindful that the full set of Bylaws is not available here and that there will be no judgement rendered here, but the information I am getting here and in scrolling through other discussions is proving to be substantial. Basically my beliefs are being confirmed although there are many approaches and interpretations to wade through.

The primary confirmation is that of a "member" and an "individual" making these motions and seconding these motions, and that the power still resides within the COR or Council of Representatives.

Thank you sMargaret for sharing your recent experience which is largely in line with commentary herein.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And to Nancy N who said "By the way, you can have my opinion, this is hair-raising. Or hair-pulling. Probably both." in regard to 8.02 Suspensions can you elaborate?

What had me croggled was the idea that a body could suspend the bylaws, period (not just some particular provision)then and there, on the spot. But come to think of it, 4/5 is an awful high hurdle; and considering that this same body could outright amend the bylaws with a lesser, 2/3 vote (albeit with plenty of previous notice), maybe my alarm was premature and excessive.

But still. Suspend the whole bylaws??!? For example. The bylaws' requirement for previous distribution is there for a purpose, like maybe allowing member groups to instruct their delegates on how to vote, or something. It's there as a basic protection of the rights of those members who are not attending the convention (the "absentees"). But should some tulip mania grip the members of the convention, then they can bypass this bylaws-mandated protection and amend the bylaws however, and however much, they want.

Just call me a worry-wart. Or nervous nellie.

(But. Great Steaming Cobnuts. Suspend the whole bylaws??!? Why not just suspend the by-Law of Gravity by a 4/5 vote, so they can step out the window and waft gently to the ground.)

BTW, ATM (boy does that look odd), I was kinda harsh above. I don't see what I could have said differently, but I regret the harshness, and I hope you don't take it amiss or be discouraged (as you seemed to be by the apparent snarkiness in the responses to your post that had inadvertently displayed the HTML tags). (And BTW, I'm taking it on faith that Guest Edgar had the terminology right, though, as a technoweenie, I have little doubt; and I expect that if he were off, a wizard like Mr. Novosielski would have set him to rights.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

A big part of this whole query is in the fear of abuse of powers, as its being done now these Motions are being sent out as a done deal.

...

A notice of a proposed bylaws amendment, no matter who or what the author is, is not a done deal. Proposed amendments can be debated (at length, if desired) by the assembly, they can be extensively amended by the assembly, and they can (of course) be voted down by the assembly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What had me croggled was the idea that a body could suspend the bylaws, period (not just some particular provision)then and there, on the spot. But come to think of it, 4/5 is an awful high hurdle; and considering that this same body could outright amend the bylaws with a lesser, 2/3 vote (albeit with plenty of previous notice), maybe my alarm was premature and excessive.

But still. Suspend the whole bylaws??!? For example. The bylaws' requirement for previous distribution is there for a purpose, like maybe allowing member groups to instruct their delegates on how to vote, or something. It's there as a basic protection of the rights of those members who are not attending the convention (the "absentees"). But should some tulip mania grip the members of the convention, then they can bypass this bylaws-mandated protection and amend the bylaws however, and however much, they want.

Just call me a worry-wart. Or nervous nellie.

(But. Great Steaming Cobnuts. Suspend the whole bylaws??!? Why not just suspend the by-Law of Gravity by a 4/5 vote, so they can step out the window and waft gently to the ground.)

BTW, ATM (boy does that look odd), I was kinda harsh above. I don't see what I could have said differently, but I regret the harshness, and I hope you don't take it amiss or be discouraged (as you seemed to be by the apparent snarkiness in the responses to your post that had inadvertently displayed the HTML tags). (And BTW, I'm taking it on faith that Guest Edgar had the terminology right, though, as a technoweenie, I have little doubt; and I expect that if he were off, a wizard like Mr. Novosielski would have set him to rights.)

Thank you for the elaboration Nancy, I hadn't quite looked at it that way and its rather relevant and concerning assuming someone got enough people behind the idea. I don't recall seeing similar provisions in other Bylaws but I wasn't looking for them and i will. The Bylaws of this organization are pretty bad by my assessment, and I've been collecting others looking for better examples and better ways. Part of the Board Powers problem is that our Bylaws state that the CEO reports to the president of the board, and I know of no such anywhere else in this country. Essentially two people can speak for 15, and that is troubling in concept and action and gives way to this whole discussion.

And again, Trina, we are in agreement on this where RONR clearly says, as many of you have, that motions happen within a deliberative body... not outside of it.

I think this matter is largely resolved in my mind and yet, like Nancy, I am a worrywart yet.

Shortly I will open another subject on the matter of starting a trial, largely because we will be in a very short time.

Thank You all for sharing here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

Shortly I will open another subject on the matter of starting a trial, largely because we will be in a very short time....

Do yourself a BIG favor, Mr McFarlane, and read Chapter Twenty (the first time). AND especially whatever your bylaws, say what you will about them (I bet you got plenty) say about discipline. And remember, we're only a mouse click away. Apparently for the rest of our lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...