Amending Constitution Article

[mombny]

For four months, the Executive Board and Committee Chairs worked on wording for a change to a Membership Article.  It was presented at a General meeting, a LOT (loud) of - pro and con discussion. Typically, changes are presented one month, voted on the next.  In error, a vote was taken, the Article change passed overwhelmingly.  After the meeting, president realized mistake, contacted Parliamentarian, it was agreed that at the next General meeting to rescind the previous month vote, and do a new vote, allowing timed limited comments;  The problem:  a handful of members, all anonymous but the writer, -  sent an email 'concerned about how the club was run' - then proceeded to email, to the Executive Board and Parliamentarian,  a full type written page on how she wants(suggesting)  the wording to be changed.  Question:  since the Executive Board and committee chairs approved the change prior to presenting to membership (the first time), what do I do with her written emailed 'suggestions'?  I know members have the right to speak, however, I don't feel it's right for the rest of membership to have to listen to this all over again.  There are a few members who agree with her.   BTW, what she has in her document, is pretty much what the board discussed prior to bringing to membership; and I also asked her to not conduct club business through email, as it was not the proper forum.   This woman, if not acknowledged, I'm afraid will make a scene. 

I want to say to her that membership elected the board, and along with that vote is trust and confidence that the board will do the best for membership. 

I can follow RR with help - this is pretty new to me - but this has me stumped and I would appreciate all the help I can get. 

[Josh Martin]

Typically, changes are presented one month, voted on the next.  In error, a vote was taken, the Article change passed overwhelmingly.

 

Is this typical practice actually specified in your bylaws?

 

After the meeting, president realized mistake, contacted Parliamentarian, it was agreed that at the next General meeting to rescind the previous month vote, and do a new vote, allowing timed limited comments; 

 

An amendment to the bylaws cannot be rescinded except by amending the bylaws. If this practice of presenting changes at one meeting and voting on them at the next is actually specified in your bylaws, then the amendment can be ruled null and void.

 

Question:  since the Executive Board and committee chairs approved the change prior to presenting to membership (the first time), what do I do with her written emailed 'suggestions'?

 

You shouldn't do anything with them. The member herself can try to amend the amendment to the bylaws, and such amendments are in order if they are within the scope of notice. Then the assembly will determine whether to adopt the amendments.

 

...I don't feel it's right for the rest of membership to have to listen to this all over again.

 

Are there enough members who agree with you on this point that you can manage to get a 2/3 vote for the Previous Question? If so, someone should move that early on and that will nip it in the bud by bringing the motion to an immediate vote. If you can't get a 2/3 vote for that, tough. I guess you'll need to listen to it all over again.

 

This woman, if not acknowledged, I'm afraid will make a scene. 

 

If the member becomes disruptive, see RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 644-648.

 

I want to say to her that membership elected the board, and along with that vote is trust and confidence that the board will do the best for membership?

 

Do you really think that will work?

 

I'd stay out of it. Tell the member that the board and committee chairs have already decided upon their proposed amendments and you don't have the authority to make any changes to them, but that she is free to propose amendments at the meeting. Then the membership will decide.

 

I'd probably avoid the "your board knows best" argument at the membership meeting too and focus on reasons why the proposed amendments are beneficial for the society, but maybe that's just me.

[mombny]

Is this typical practice actually specified in your bylaws?

Yes

 

An amendment to the bylaws cannot be rescinded except by amending the bylaws. If this practice of presenting changes at one meeting and voting on them at the next is actually specified in your bylaws, then the amendment can be ruled null and void.

To rule 'null and void' - that's done by motion, 2nd, favor, opposed, abst.? or .....  Can someone say after that 'null and void' process, immediately make a motion to take a revote then and there? or do I have to mention the member with other suggestions:  If last months vote is ruled 'null and void', do I then read the new amendment, motion for vote, take a vote? or do I have to at that time say 'there is a member, etc......" - say " is there a motion to hear a members comments?  --- if  someone says 'I move to take a vote on the new amendment" before a motion can be made to hear the member, we then go through the motion to vote, and then vote

 

You shouldn't do anything with them. The member herself can try to amend the amendment to the bylaws, and such amendments are in order if they are within the scope of notice. Then the assembly will determine whether to adopt the amendments.    Do I or the member make the motion to hear her comments?  if there is a second, do I do a 'favor, opposed, abst?  is this where a motion to not hear her comes in?

 

 

Are there enough members who agree with you on this point that you can manage to get a 2/3 vote for the Previous Question? If so, someone should move that early on and that will nip it in the bud by bringing the motion to an immediate vote. If you can't get a 2/3 vote for that, tough. I guess you'll need to listen to it all over again.  Where do you mean 'early on' -   I think there would be 2/3 on this

 

 

If the member becomes disruptive, see RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 644-648.   thanx

 

 

Do you really think that will work?  Point taken, re 'board....best interest'....  I didn't think of it as a persuasion, but as a reminder. 

 

I'd stay out of it. Tell the member that the board and committee chairs have already decided upon their proposed amendments and you don't have the authority to make any changes to them, but that she is free to propose amendments at the meeting. Then the membership will decide.   This sounds better

 

I'd probably avoid the "your board knows best" argument at the membership meeting too and focus on reasons why the proposed amendments are beneficial for the society, but maybe that's just me.    thanx.    I have another issue I'll be sending along soon. 

[Josh Martin]

To rule 'null and void' - that's done by motion, 2nd, favor, opposed, abst.? or .....  Can someone say after that 'null and void' process, immediately make a motion to take a revote then and there? or do I have to mention the member with other suggestions:  If last months vote is ruled 'null and void', do I then read the new amendment, motion for vote, take a vote? or do I have to at that time say 'there is a member, etc......" - say " is there a motion to hear a members comments?  --- if  someone says 'I move to take a vote on the new amendment" before a motion can be made to hear the member, we then go through the motion to vote, and then vote

 

No.

 

The chair should rule that the vote is null and void because the assembly's rules require that the vote cannot be taken until the meeting after the amendment is presented. The chair should then state the question on the amendment and open the floor to debate or subsidiary motions (such as amendments). Members have a right to speak in debate. There is no need for a motion to hear a member's comments. The member would simply rise and address the chair to seek recognition to speak in debate or make a motion.

 

If a member wishes, he may move the Previous Question (often colloquially called "Call to Question"). This motion is undebatable and requires a 2/3 vote for adoption. If the Previous Question is adopted, then the assembly will immediately take a vote on the underlying motion.

 

Do I or the member make the motion to hear her comments?  if there is a second, do I do a 'favor, opposed, abst?  is this where a motion to not hear her comes in?

 

No. There is no need for a motion to hear the member's comments. She has a right to speak in debate or make motions. The member simply rises and addresses the chair to seek recognition. When she is recognized, she can proceed to speak in debate on the pending motion or make an appropriate motion (most likely a motion to Amend, since it seems that her goal is to change the proposed amendments to the bylaws). A motion to not hear her is not in order. You can't single out individual members that you don't want to let speak. 

 

A member may, however, move the Previous Question in order to end debate altogether, or move to Limit Debate to limit the total amount of time in debate (no default limit), the number of speeches each member may make in debate (default limit is two), and/or the amount of time a member can speak in debate (default limit is ten minutes each time). Either of these motions is undebatable and requires a majority vote for adoption. These motions are not in order once another member has the floor, so if you really want to cut her off the members who make these motions will need to get recognized first.

 

Where do you mean 'early on' -   I think there would be 2/3 on this

 

As early in the debate as you think you can get a 2/3 vote to end debate. A member could immediately seek recognition after the chair stated the question on the motion and, after he is recognized, move the Previous Question.

[mombny]

Josh

How soon can you get to Pawleys Island, SC?      Joking.  Your input has been invaluable and most appreciated.  Much is cleared up for me.