Bylaw interpretation

[Traveling Bill]

I have a question about how an executive committee interprets bylaws. I found nothing in RONR to address this topic, but maybe I missed it.

I am a club officer and member of the exec committee. The club bylaws state, among other things, "the executive committee shall..., and formulate and enforce rules and regulations". The items between shall and the comma are all done by the exec committee. The formulation of rules and regs is handed over to a sub-committee.

The sub-committee makes recommendations to the exec committee. One exec committee member is the sub-committee chair and a few of the other exec committee members are also members of the sub-committee. IMO, they get 2 chances to shape policy and vote. That doesn't feel right to me. The exec committee is usually narrowly spilt when the sub-committee items come up for a vote.

But the main point of this query is since the exec committee does virtually everything else itself, is it appropriate to dish out rules and regulation formulation and enforcement? When I questioned the other exec committee members, one of them (also a sub-committee member) said the bylaws say we have to do it, but doesn't say how we do it.

[Tim Wynn]

I have a question about how an executive committee interprets bylaws. I found nothing in RONR to address this topic, but maybe I missed it.

I am a club officer and member of the exec committee. The club bylaws state, among other things, "the executive committee shall..., and formulate and enforce rules and regulations". The items between shall and the comma are all done by the exec committee. The formulation of rules and regs is handed over to a sub-committee.

The sub-committee makes recommendations to the exec committee. One exec committee member is the sub-committee chair and a few of the other exec committee members are also members of the sub-committee. IMO, they get 2 chances to shape policy and vote. That doesn't feel right to me. The exec committee is usually narrowly spilt when the sub-committee items come up for a vote.

But the main point of this query is since the exec committee does virtually everything else itself, is it appropriate to dish out rules and regulation formulation and enforcement? When I questioned the other exec committee members, one of them (also a sub-committee member) said the bylaws say we have to do it, but doesn't say how we do it.

An Executive Committee is actually in the nature of a board, and it sounds like "Executive Committee" may be the name your group has given to its Executive Board. So, these subcommittees are probably committees.

Anyway, it is proper for a board to refer matters to a subordinate committee for consideration. That committee would then report recommendations. The board would maintain the authority over the adoption of the rules, though. It is perfectly proper for a board member to serve on such a committee.

A board cannot delegate its authority to a subordinate group, but it doesn't sound like that is what's happening here.

[Trina]

...bylaws state, among other things, "the executive committee shall..., and formulate and enforce rules and regulations". The items between shall and the comma are all done by the exec committee. The formulation of rules and regs is handed over to a sub-committee.

The sub-committee makes recommendations to the exec committee. One exec committee member is the sub-committee chair and a few of the other exec committee members are also members of the sub-committee. IMO, they get 2 chances to shape policy and vote. That doesn't feel right to me. The exec committee is usually narrowly spilt when the sub-committee items come up for a vote.

But the main point of this query is since the exec committee does virtually everything else itself, is it appropriate to dish out rules and regulation formulation and enforcement? When I questioned the other exec committee members, one of them (also a sub-committee member) said the bylaws say we have to do it, but doesn't say how we do it.

...

Anyway, it is proper for a board to refer matters to a subordinate committee for consideration. That committee would then report recommendations. The board would maintain the authority over the adoption of the rules, though. It is perfectly proper for a board member to serve on such a committee.

A board cannot delegate its authority to a subordinate group, but it doesn't sound like that is what's happening here.

Based on the mention of formulation and enforcement, I do wonder if the sub-committee has assumed the authority to enforce rules. It sounds like the formulation of the rules is in the nature of recommendations, which are then voted on by the higher body. It's not clear whether the sub-committee is making independent decisions about enforcement (perhaps outside the bounds of what is permitted to a subordinate body).