By-Law Change Request

[Guest Jen]

I have a question. There has been a submitted request for a by-law change.  The request is going to effect other parts of the by-laws but the submitted change does not address the other effected areas.  Is that an incomplete submitted request?    Can we accept this request as written and if so how do we handle the other changes that need to be made? It effects several areas in our by-laws.

 

They want to add a board member position but does not specify when the board member is to be elected (per our by-laws for existing board members elections are even or odd years).

 

Any help would be appreciated. 

 

Thanks,

 

Jen

[Chris Harrison]

What do you mean by "request"?  Did they actually supply language that will be considered and voted on at a meeting or are they just saying "we want this that and the other" and leaving it to someone else to draft the language?  If they actually supplied the language then it probably would fall out of scope of notice to perfect the amendment at the meeting by adding those details.  If it is possible someone should offer an amendment which includes the details and hopefully the person who made the first request will withdraw theirs after learning that a more perfected one has been proposed.

 

If it was just a request for what the member wants to see in the bylaws without having supplied the language I don't see why whoever is responsible for drafting the language couldn't perfect the amendment with those details prior to submitting it to the assembly for consideration (subject to any rules limiting how much perfection can be made to such a "request").

[Guest Edgar]

Can we accept this request as written . . . 

 

As Mr. Harrison suggests, bylaws are not changed by making "requests", they're changed by making a motion to amend them. So you could suggest to this person that he improve the language of his proposed motion by including the additional considerations you mention. It will then be debated on the merits of adding an additional board member, not on any technical flaws it might have contained. This is not to say that the motion couldn't be modified during the debate process but it's much better if you can get it right the first time.

[jstackpo]

And, if in the worst of all possible worlds, a poorly phrased, incomplete motion makes it to the meeting, you have (at least) two choices:

 

1)  Defeat it  --  this might suggest to the "requestor" to do a better job next time.

 

2)  Refer it to the Bylaws Committee with instructions to fix it up and report back next meeting.

[Chris Harrison]

2)  Refer it to the Bylaws Committee with instructions to fix it up and report back next meeting.

Would referring it to a Committee take care of any scope of notice issues that exist?  I would think if the amendment only added a Board member without addressing when they are to be elected adding that part in the meeting would exceed the scope of notice.

[jstackpo]

Scope Issue:  True  --  I (implicitly  --  can't you read between my lines?) assumed that the messy motion at least covered all the bases:

 

"I move that we add a new member to the board, and all the places in the bylaws effected by this be fixed accordingly".

[Guest Edgar]

I would think if the amendment only added a Board member without addressing when they are to be elected adding that part in the meeting would exceed the scope of notice.

 

I wouldn't.

 

If notice was given of a proposed amendment to paint the clubhouse red and, at the meeting, an amendment (to the amendment) was offered to paint the clubhouse red on the next sunny weekend, I'm not sure that that would fall beyond the scope of the notice.