Guest Karenb58 Posted June 3, 2014 at 07:48 PM Report Share Posted June 3, 2014 at 07:48 PM Is it proper procedure to deny discussion of an item on the agenda? For example: Emails are sent out to Board Members for any input as to revision of the ByLaws for an organization. The input was considered by committee members and proposed ByLaws are submitted to the Board for a vote. When a member tried to discuss the issue they were told that they had the opportunity for input by email and a vote was called thus denying discussion on the item. At no time was there any agreement that there would be no discussion during the regular meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted June 3, 2014 at 07:52 PM Report Share Posted June 3, 2014 at 07:52 PM In answer to you first sentence question: NO! The members at the meeting can terminate discussion by adopting the motion "Previous Question", but that requires a 2/3 vote. E-mail discussions and decisions are of no consequence (unless your bylaws allow them); besides how could you have an e-mail "discussion" when all you could do is send your input in to an individual? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Karenb58 Posted June 3, 2014 at 07:57 PM Report Share Posted June 3, 2014 at 07:57 PM Thank you! Finally someone with common sense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted June 3, 2014 at 08:22 PM Report Share Posted June 3, 2014 at 08:22 PM You're welcome! (May I quote you? ) Come again and ask more questions.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Karenb58 Posted June 3, 2014 at 08:29 PM Report Share Posted June 3, 2014 at 08:29 PM Yes you may and I appreciate your help! I may be sending others! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nancy N. Posted June 4, 2014 at 01:26 PM Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 at 01:26 PM In answer to you first sentence question: NO! The members at the meeting can terminate discussion by adopting the motion "Previous Question", but that requires a 2/3 vote. E-mail discussions and decisions are of no consequence (unless your bylaws allow them) ;... I think the point to be emphasized here is that, notwithstanding how much or how fruitful discussion outside of a meeting might have been -- and members of organizations have been discussing the organization's issues outside meetings, whether over the telephone; or by dropping in at a neighbor's; or seeing a few like-minded (and maybe some un-like-minded, but sociable) members at a neighborhood bar or at the beach in Malibu, or on the bus after work if a few of them have the same commute -- this discussion has no effect (is of "no consequence," in Dr. Stackpole's college-graduate terms) on the requirement that debate be allowed at a meeting, once a motion has been made and stated by the chair. Guest Karen b58, don''t put up with this again. Take ten minutes (the first time) to read up in your RONR-In Brief about the processes of raising a Point of Order and Appealing. ... how could you have an e-mail "discussion" when all you could do is send your input in to an individual?O John. Most people's e-mail (I hazard, with no data) allows sending to multiple recipients, and replying also allows replying to sender vs. replying to all. Come join the 20th Century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted June 4, 2014 at 01:31 PM Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 at 01:31 PM I'm still wondering why the board is voting on bylaws amendments, and not the general membership. That's not unheard of, but it's a little suspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted June 4, 2014 at 01:56 PM Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 at 01:56 PM O John. Most people's e-mail (I hazard, with no data) allows sending to multiple recipients, and replying also allows replying to sender vs. replying to all. Come join the 20th Century. Oh, I knew that... But the original post read (to me, anyway) that folks who wished to comment on the bylaws could send such remarks in to "the committee" only. They, the remarks, wouldn't be seen by the other board members. But who knows? (Well, actually, Karenb58 knows.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timothy Posted June 4, 2014 at 02:02 PM Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 at 02:02 PM O John. Most people's e-mail (I hazard, with no data) allows sending to multiple recipients, and replying also allows replying to sender vs. replying to all. Come join the 20th Century. While it is true that we can send e-mail to more than one person with a single click, there is no guarantee that they will hit the "Reply All" button or that they will reply at all. I've been involved in several of these e-mail "discussions" and there are usually a few people who never respond at all. We get to the meeting and discover that they haven't read their e-mail yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nancy N. Posted June 4, 2014 at 02:58 PM Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 at 02:58 PM While it is true that we can send e-mail to more than one person with a single click, there is no guarantee that they will hit the "Reply All" button or that they will reply at all. I've been involved in several of these e-mail "discussions" and there are usually a few people who never respond at all. We get to the meeting and discover that they haven't read their e-mail yet. Uh huh. But this isn't specifically an e-mail issue. It's like if everyone on our cabal's list got called on the telephone (kid's, it's a machine that's like a smart phone but without Grand Theft Auto), and everyone discussed the matter thoroughly except those who didn't answer their phone (or reply to the answering-machine or voice-mail) : they're outta luck, as far as prefatory conversation is concerned, and they are left with ... um ... left with what RONR contemplates as everyone's complete venue for consideration (or deliberation, I forget which is which) of any subject: the meeting. -- Which is what Dr. Stackpole said in post 2, and someone else emphasized around post 6. By the way, Gary Novosielski might have made the most salient point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Karenb58 Posted June 5, 2014 at 02:05 PM Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 at 02:05 PM The Board was voting on whether to approve the proposed bylaws to be sent to the general membership. Discussion was requested at both meetings and was denied. It won't happen again! Thanks for all the input! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Ralph Posted June 8, 2014 at 02:43 PM Report Share Posted June 8, 2014 at 02:43 PM Bear in mind also that unless the bylaws themselves say so, the board has no part in amending them and does not approve amendments before the membership votes on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.