Guest Dave Lushbaugh Posted July 15, 2014 at 08:26 PM Report Share Posted July 15, 2014 at 08:26 PM If Robert's Rules are to be the "default rules" of an organization - wouldn't the By-Laws have to state such? That is to say when other rules or laws do not address the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted July 15, 2014 at 08:33 PM Report Share Posted July 15, 2014 at 08:33 PM While the bylaws should designate RONR as the organization's parliamentary authority, if they are silent on this question then commonly accepted parliamentary procedures would apply (if push came to shove). And the best codification of commonly accepted parliamentary procedure is . . . wait for it . . . RONR. Click here to see how your organization can adopt RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted July 15, 2014 at 08:34 PM Report Share Posted July 15, 2014 at 08:34 PM If Robert's Rules are to be the "default rules" of an organization - wouldn't the By-Laws have to state such? That is to say when other rules or laws do not address the situation.This would be the preferred language that should be incorporated into your bylaws to adopt RONR as your parliamentary authority, "The rules contained in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the Organization in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with these bylaws and any special rules of order the Organization may adopt." If you're asking if a bylaw amendment is the only way to adopt RONR as your parliamentary authority, the answer is "no." But it is the best way. If you're asking if adopting RONR as your parliamentary authority is the only way that its text would have a bearing on a question of order affecting your organization, again the answer is "no." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.