suspension of a bylaw

[Guest pam]

Our church has by-laws that dictate the number of members per committee. Due to the decrease in our church size, it is being proposed that we suspend the by-laws that govern the types of  committees and their sizes in order to try a different  structure with fewer members.

Is this suspension allowed inder RROO?

[Timothy]

No

[Guest Guest]

No

What would be the proper procedure to accomplish this? It is only being proposed for a two year period and then we will reevaluate. 

[Chris Harrison]

Amend the bylaws to change/remove the required number of Committee members.

[Timothy]

What would be the proper procedure to accomplish this? It is only being proposed for a two year period and then we will reevaluate. 

 

As stated above, the proper procedure is to amend the bylaws. If after two years (or for that matter, two months) you don't like what you've changed it to, you would just amend the bylaws again. You might find it more convenient to leave the size of the committees out of the bylaws and specify the size in the standing rules.

[Edgar Guest]

You might find it more convenient to leave the size of the committees out of the bylaws and specify the size in the standing rules.

 

Or don't specify the size at all. 

[Timothy]

Or don't specify the size at all. 

 

Maybe, but there is no such thing as a committee without a size. Someone is going to specify a size at some point.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

... by-laws that dictate the number of members per committee.

... it is being proposed that we suspend the by-laws that govern

the types of  committees and

their sizes

in order to try a different  structure with fewer members.

 

Do this, then.

 

Amend the bylaws, and put in a RANGE.

 

Don't fix the size at "six" or "three".

Instead, say "... from two to twelve ..." (or whatever RANGE you feel will always be appropriate.

 

Or say, "No more than ten."

Or say, "No fewer than four."

That likewise allows for a "range" of members sitting on a committee, but puts a "ceiling" or "floor" on the number.

[Edgar Guest]

Maybe, but there is no such thing as a committee without a size. Someone is going to specify a size at some point.

 

Why?

[Timothy]

It is a fact that every committee has a size.

[Guest Jean Wilson]

So for sub-committees, if bylaws contain "a minimum of x members" statement and several members of each sub-committee leave the membership of the full committee, are the sub-committees forbidden from acting until the empty seats are filled, or can remaining members of each sub-committee continue their work?  Are the sub-committees in effect disbanded because they don't contain the minimum number of members?

[Timothy]

So for sub-committees, if bylaws contain "a minimum of x members" statement and several members of each sub-committee leave the membership of the full committee, are the sub-committees forbidden from acting until the empty seats are filled, or can remaining members of each sub-committee continue their work?  Are the sub-committees in effect disbanded because they don't contain the minimum number of members?

 

Another possible interpretation of that statement is that you can't accept the resignation of a committee member if doing so would reduce the size of the sub-committee below the minimum.

[Guest Jean Wilson]

In this circumstance the vacancies were created by members' term on the full committee expiring and failure to be reelected, not resignations.  Sub-committee appointments will be done in a few months, per bylaws and vacancies were not temporarily filled.  So do the subcommittees suspend work, or mush on, albeit short-handed?  Naturally, some subcommittees have ongoing responsibility.  It would be common sense to mush on, in my way of thinking. Just wondering if Roberts' covers this.

[Timothy]

In this circumstance the vacancies were created by members' term on the full committee expiring and failure to be reelected, not resignations.  Sub-committee appointments will be done in a few months, per bylaws and vacancies were not temporarily filled.  So do the subcommittees suspend work, or mush on, albeit short-handed?  Naturally, some subcommittees have ongoing responsibility.  It would be common sense to mush on, in my way of thinking. Just wondering if Roberts' covers this.

 

It sounds like your bylaws are written in such a way that they are in conflict with themselves. If so, that is something your organization will have to straighten out.

[Guest Jimm]

Can the bylaws be amended with a stipulaton?   In other words, can the amendment to change the bylaws say the amendment will be in effect for a 2 year period, at which time it reverts back to the previous bylaws unless there is a vote to have them continued, either for another period, or permanently from that vote onward?

 

 

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Can the bylaws be amended with a stipulaton?   In other words, can the amendment to change the bylaws say the amendment will be in effect for a 2 year period, at which time it reverts back to the previous bylaws unless there is a vote to have them continued, either for another period, or permanently from that vote onward?

Jimm,

Whoa!

 

You are altering the whole theme of Pam (original poster).

Please start a new thread.

Use a subject line like, "New bylaw with stipulation" or better, for the sake of Robertian phraseology, "Bylaw with provisio".

(That is a hint to Jimm to look up "provisio" in Robert's Rules of Order.)

[Edgar Guest]

It is a fact that every committee has a size.

 

Well of course, but the size doesn't have to be specified (and therefore delimited) in advance (i.e. in the rules). Sometimes a committee of one will do the job. Sometime you might want three. Sometime thirty.

 

By the way, I'm not saying that the bylaws shouldn't (or should) designate the size of certain standing committees (as the sample bylaws in RONR do), I'm saying it would be unwise for the bylaws to "dictate the number of members per committee" as a general rule.

[Gary Novosielski]

And in a surprising number of organizations, committees are set up, and whoever shows up is "on" the committee.

[Guest Pam]

Thank you all for this lively discussion and help.

It appears we must amend the by-law to accommodate our trial committee structure. I think we will use the minimum number idea for members.

[Edgar Guest]

(That is a hint to Jimm to look up "provisio" in Robert's Rules of Order.)

 

A word, I'm afraid, he'll fail to find.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Sorry for the mis-spelling.

 

PROVISO

[pro- vie - zo]

n. a condition.

 

(there is no extra "I", not "provisio").

[Guest Jimm]

Jimm,

Whoa!

 

You are altering the whole theme of Pam (original poster).

Please start a new thread.

Use a subject line like, "New bylaw with stipulation" or better, for the sake of Robertian phraseology, "Bylaw with provisio".

(That is a hint to Jimm to look up "provisio" in Robert's Rules of Order.)

Thanks Kim,

 

Yes, provisio, that was the term I was looking for.  But, my suggestion is not a new topic, and is germane to Pam's quest.

 

Regardless, the organization is not going to be able to simply suspend the current bylaws without an amendment.  My comment was more a subtle suggestion that if they are going to amend the bylaws, and are worried that the change should only be of a temporary nature (which was her origional premise), to consider a provisio (I hastily called it a "stipulation").  The word is different, but the concept is the same.

 

regards,

 

Jimm

[Edgar Guest]

Yes, provisio, that was the term I was looking for. 

 

Well, not exactly.

 

In any event, I suppose it's possible to add a rule to the bylaws that will only be in effect for a fixed period (e.g. two years). But, at the end of that period (or shortly thereafter), you'd probably want to remove that vestigial rule. So, either way, you end up amending the bylaws twice.

[Timothy]

But since the bylaws specify how they may be amended, couldn't the rule provide for its own removal without the need of additional action?

[Richard Brown]

But since the bylaws specify how they may be amended, couldn't the rule provide for its own removal without the need of additional action?

Yes.  It can specify a limited period of time that the amendment is in effect and can specify a definite date after which that provision ceases to have any effect.