number of pages in a bylaws (aka too long)

[rynait]

Hello, 

 

at recent convention, prior to  members voted to refuse to adopt (they not even bother to read in) the proposed bylaws. 

 

President stated few months ago, both lawyer and parlimentarian indicated bylaws (reference to 2011 and 2013 bylaws is too long, which is only measly 20 pages long).  

 

Parlimentarian also stated (in workshop) extras so desired should go into policies, or whatever is named as standing rules material.

 

Also my extrapolating on their (president-lawyer-parlimentarian) interpretation, if bylaws refers to RONR (traditional procedures), then the organization has to deal with 600 plus pages of documents, thus moot point on being too long.

 

I interpret the reason for bylaws could be as many pages, as long members desires/expect how organization should function (regardless of exploiting RONR if matches) and approves, 

 

(section removed per discussion)

 

Well I suspected this methodology (bylaws-policy) meant policy procedures could be suspended (by board) without the membership's intent. Does policy/standing rules override RONR? 

 

Is there justification or actions required by RONR-parlimentarians directing 'reduce the bylaws to fewer pages and splitting document into bylaws and policy' an necessary action? 

 

R

[Kim Goldsworthy]

I don't know what you are asking.

 

Is there justification or actions required by RONR-parlimentarians

directing 'reduce the bylaws to fewer pages and splitting document

into bylaws and policy' a necessary action?

 

"Necessary"?

No.

But the fact that the general membership voted down the present configuration is a clue -- The membership, the highest authority, does not believe in 20-page bylaws for their own organization.

So, since 20 pages is too long, then while not "necessary", it is apparently a "demand" by the general membership that 20 pages be reduced to fewer pages.

 

Why are you so insistent on 20-page bylaws?

What's wrong with 18? 16?

 

***

 

Does policy/standing rules override RONR?

 

No.

 

***

I suspected this methodology (bylaws-policy) meant

policy procedures could be suspended (by board)

without the membership's intent.

 

If your "fear" is a "suspension of rules",

then when you draft your rule,

draft the suspension rule for it.

 

The customized suspension rule will supersede the default method of suspension in Robert's Rules of Order.

 

***

 

Also.

 

Your name-calling is just unnecessary overkill.

We (readers) do not need to know your psychological commentary to answer questions on parliamentary procedure.

 

Just ask the question.

Leave out the personalities.

It violates decorum.

***

[Edgar Guest]

President stated few months ago, both lawyer and parlimentarian indicated bylaws (reference to 2011 and 2013 bylaws is too long, which is only measly 20 pages long). . . . Also my extrapolating on their (president-lawyer-parlimentarian) interpretation, if bylaws refers to RONR (traditional procedures), then the organization has to deal with 600 plus pages of documents, thus moot point on being too long.

 

The fact that RONR consists of more than 700 pages does not mean that bylaws consisting of a "measly" 20 pages are not too long. The sample bylaws in RONR are less than 6 pages long. It's not the quantity, it's the quality. And, often, less is more.

 

This leads me to feel  those three are idiots (president maybe egostic, bad or lazy attourney, and parlimentarian [from national parlimentarian association] missed the bylaws importance-influence)

I'm not sure someone who can't spell (or can't type) should be casting stones.

[rynait]

Hello, 

 

let me then edit on the name calling.  

 

I did not say the member's decison on 20 pages. It was those three's recommendation.  I was consulted by member, becoming aware of membership confusion.  is it necessary to reduce pages, required. so forth.

 

because bylaws is membership's desire or expectations on how the organization be operated. I believed the answer was NOT necessary or required to reduce anything that seems to be acceptable at that time.

 

my question is 

Is there justification or actions required by RONR-parlimentarians directing 'reduce the bylaws to fewer pages and splitting document into bylaws and policy' an necessary action? 

 

restating this question,  is this bylaw page reduction or splitting into two parts a necessary action that you would recommend to your organization?

 

R

[Edgar Guest]

my question is 

Is there justification or actions required by RONR-parlimentarians directing 'reduce the bylaws to fewer pages and splitting document into bylaws and policy' an necessary action?

It's neither required nor necessary.

 

restating this question,  is this bylaw page reduction or splitting into two parts a necessary action that you would recommend to your organization?

I have no organization but, if I did, I recommend that the bylaws be as brief as possible.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Hello, 

 

let me then edit on the name calling.  

 

I did not say the member's decison on 20 pages. It was those three's recommendation.  I was consulted by member, becoming aware of membership confusion.  is it necessary to reduce pages, required. so forth.

 

because bylaws is membership's desire or expectations on how the organization be operated. I believed the answer was NOT necessary or required to reduce anything that seems to be acceptable at that time.

 

my question is 

Is there justification or actions required by RONR-parlimentarians directing 'reduce the bylaws to fewer pages and splitting document into bylaws and policy' an necessary action? 

 

restating this question,  

is this bylaw page reduction or splitting into two parts a necessary action that you would recommend to your organization?

 

 

"Required?"

 

No.

Organizations are free to litter their bylaws with fluff. -- If they want to (i.e., if a majority vote agree, or two thirds vote agree, whatever the vote threshold happens to be.)

Example: There is nothing in RONR which says, "You must include 'bank signature responsibility' in your bylaws!"

That's just way too trivial to mess with bylaws.

 

.. is this bylaw page reduction or splitting into two parts

a necessary action that you would recommend to your organization?

 

Again, with the "necessary".

No it is not necessary.

 

But if you have adminstrative duties in your bylaws, then chances are, it is not organic to the STRUCTURE of the organization.

Bylaws define structure.

Duties should not be in bylaws, since there are an infinite number of duties for officers.

Bylaws, if they do hold duties, then should not be exahustive list of duties, but hit the topmost duty(s), and leave the rest for your policy book.

E.g., if you were to list all duties of the treasurer, then your bylaws would be two pages longer than normal. -- No one can anticipate all duties of the treassurer, when unexpected scenarios pop up.

Never mind the Secretary, the Vice President, the President.

[rynait]

The fact that RONR consists of more than 700 pages does not mean that bylaws consisting of a "measly" 20 pages are not too long. The sample bylaws in RONR are less than 6 pages long. It's not the quantity, it's the quality. And, often, less is more.

 

I suspect there are organizations that have "more pages" of bylaws than 20. 

[Edgar Guest]

I suspect there are organizations that have "more pages" of bylaws than 20. 

 

I'm sure there are. But there's no reason to think they're any better than the six-page sample bylaws in RONR.

 

Or however many pages constitute the U.S. Constitution.

 

But if you want to argue that there are longer and crappier bylaws than yours, you'll get no argument from me.

[Josh Martin]

I suspect there are organizations that have "more pages" of bylaws than 20.

The number of pages necessary for an organization's bylaws will vary from organization to organization.

The key is, as Mr. Goldsworthy notes, what is in the bylaws. RONR advises that the bylaws be limited to the rules fundamental to the structure of the organization or the rights of its members, or those rules which the organization wishes to make it very difficult to change. Most administrative details should be put in lower-level rules.

[rynait]

But if you have adminstrative duties in your bylaws, then chances are, it is not organic to the STRUCTURE of the organization.

Bylaws define structure.

Duties should not be in bylaws, since there are an infinite number of duties for officers.

Bylaws, if they do hold duties, then should not be exahustive list of duties, but hit the topmost duty(s), and leave the rest for your policy book.

E.g., if you were to list all duties of the treasurer, then your bylaws would be two pages longer than normal. -- No one can anticipate all duties of the treassurer, when unexpected scenarios pop up.

Never mind the Secretary, the Vice President, the President.

 

interesting interpretation. i might have some suspicions that might be the source leading on your confusion on "bylaw splitting" reasoning.

 

If membership wanted an defined duty (could be few or long) be unsuspendable. Then with your interpretation, leads on to "how would this be placed; in bylaws or policy?"

 

You stated that policy or standing rule do not override RONR.  

 

the "suspending the rule"in RONR would apply onto policy thus resulting in upset membership if board suspended the supposedly unsuspended duties if found in the policy.

 

I would continue on with the semantics or logistics on this actions, intent, and results.

 

But is clear there is a division between two three responder, one two says ok (one suggest brief). other says split. 

 

R

[rynait]

Hello, 

 

pause here... I am re reading the RONR

 

R

[rynait]

Hello, 

 

made a small chart (using excel).  

 

could that be attached here?  

 

R

[Edgar Guest]

made a small chart (using excel).  

 

could that be attached here?

 

Could it be? Yes.

 

Should it be? Probably not.

[rynait]

Hello, 

 

better to cut n paste the chart in here (text box) rather than attach?

 

R

[Edgar Guest]

better to cut n paste the chart in here (text box) rather than attach?

 

Better, perhaps, to do neither.

[Josh Martin]

interesting interpretation. i might have some suspicions that might be the source leading on your confusion on "bylaw splitting" reasoning.

 

If membership wanted an defined duty (could be few or long) be unsuspendable. Then with your interpretation, leads on to "how would this be placed; in bylaws or policy?"

 

You stated that policy or standing rule do not override RONR.  

 

the "suspending the rule"in RONR would apply onto policy thus resulting in upset membership if board suspended the supposedly unsuspended duties if found in the policy.

 

I would continue on with the semantics or logistics on this actions, intent, and results.

 

But is clear there is a division between two three responder, one two says ok (one suggest brief). other says split. 

 

Well, I think what Mr. Goldsworthy means when he says that policies or standing rules do not override RONR is simply that they do not conflict with RONR, as RONR does not address administrative details.

 

As for your concerns regarding suspension, rules may only be suspended within the context of meetings (and in some cases, even those rules may not be suspended). Moving rules from the bylaws to lower-level rules will not make them any easier to suspend. It will make them easier to amend. So as noted, if it is desirable that it is very difficult to amend a particular rule, then that is another reason to put it in the bylaws.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Example.
Imagine if an organization were to go on a Fool’s Errand

and try to list all the “reasonable” duties of one officer. — Say, the treasurer.

What would the bylaw look like?
How long would the bylaws be?

. . .
24. Update signature card at bank, when elections result in new officers sitting on the board.
25. Have the phone number of the annual audit company or preferred C.P.A. firm listed in the Treasurer’s Duty Book.
26. Recruit assistant treasurer (unpaid position).
27. Contact IRS on newest 501c3 resgulation.
28. Attend Sarbanes—Oxley Act seminar on legal corporate reporting requirements.
. . .

 

Q. Are the above “reasonable” things for a treasurer to do?
A. Yes.

Q. Are the above duties to be listed in one’s bylaws?
A. In a pig’s eye.
 

[rynait]

Hello,

 

okay (not share chart)  

 

RONR p 11 to 19 does not restrict any of instruments pages to x numbers. 

 

however RONR does states all unsuspendable rules has to be in the bylaws. Rest of the instruments could be suspendable. The only exception given in the RONR; suspension clause (usually conditional) on the rule in bylaws must be written in bylaws also.

 

interpretatively, if rule is administrative or other, if member wanted this be unsuspendable, has to be in bylaws. 

 

on the statement president said being too many pages.

 

Lawyer and parlimentarian probably meant to phrase a question to president two months ago as their attempt to seperate what is unsuspendable and suspendable rules (left out whether it is administrative or not). I do not want to end up making more assumptions on the unknown communication content, regardless.... 

 

This confusion is probably excaberated as president picking this up as "too many page bylaws", and brought this assumption back to the membership. 

 

I have to say for those membership, including president need to have an workshop or brief lecture on bylaws with emphasis on "unsuspendables", whether to split to other instruments (and pages thing), and clarify impact-obilgation decisions between membership vs board vs lawyer-parlimentarian. 

 

R

[rynait]

Example.

Imagine if an organization were to go on a Fool’s Errand

and try to list all the “reasonable” duties of one officer. — Say, the treasurer.

What would the bylaw look like?

How long would the bylaws be?

 

 

yes. If that is what member want.

 

 I still see in RONR  all unsuspendable rules in bylaws.  if that results in 1,000 pages long, That was members' decision. But in RONR,  is member's responsibility to read bylaws too. 

 

I am sure in hindsight member will react upon recieving  "this is 1 thousand pages bylaws, why too many pages" (probably quit membership or leave it somewhere and forget). They should have been told about unsuspendable and other instruments. 

 

that is what i meant by "measly 20 pages" (to me) and 6 page per Edgar is quick bylaws.  

 

R

[Josh Martin]

however RONR does states all unsuspendable rules has to be in the bylaws. Rest of the instruments could be suspendable. The only exception given in the RONR; suspension clause (usually conditional) on the rule in bylaws must be written in bylaws also.

 

interpretatively, if rule is administrative or other, if member wanted this be unsuspendable, has to be in bylaws. 

 

No. This is incorrect. Not all rules which are not in the bylaws are suspendable, and not all rules which are in the bylaws are unsuspendable. As you note, rules in the bylaws may be suspended if the bylaws provide for their own suspension, but they may also be suspended if they are in the nature of a rule of order. Rules which are in other documents are not necessarily suspendable. We have, for instance, been discussing administrative rules a great deal. Rules which have their application outside of a meeting context cannot be suspended. See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 263-265 for more information.

[Shmuel Gerber]

I think what the OP now wants to know is why item 4 on page 13 states that the bylaws "includes all rules that the society considers so important that they (a) cannot be changed without previous notice… and (b ) cannot be suspended," if the suspendibility of a rule is not generaly dependent on whether it is placed in the bylaws.

[Dan Honemann]

I think what the OP now wants to know is why item 4 on page 13 states that the bylaws "includes all rules that the society considers so important that they (a) cannot be changed without previous notice… and (b ) cannot be suspended," if the suspendibility of a rule is not generaly dependent on whether it is placed in the bylaws.

 

Well, it may become clearer to him if he follows Josh's advice and reads Section 25 rather carefully. Suspension of a rule, in this context, relates to an assembly enabling itself to do something during a meeting which cannot be done without violating an applicable rule.

[rynait]

Hello, 

 

Suspension is not the origin of the problem addressed here.  the origin addressing is too many pages and splitting the bylaws.

 

I am trying to comprehend why parlimentarian suggest this is necessary thing (should have been encouragement or recommendation).  

 

It is now clear from discussion that i conclude with 

 

multiple page bylaws is fine  It is membership decision to what is in there.  and the board is not supposed to suspend any rules in the bylaws.

 

at later times, next meetings I am going to find out how much does membership understand the difference between rule(s) that can be suspend and hard-fixing the rule(s). 

 

R

[Edgar Guest]

at later times, next meetings I am going to find out how much does membership understand the difference between rule(s) that can be suspend and hard-fixing the rule(s). 

 

I think you and the membership will be a lot happier if you simply forget about suspending the rules.

[Rev Ed]

 

restating this question,  is this bylaw page reduction or splitting into two parts a necessary action that you would recommend to your organization?

 

I would say its up to the members to decide what they do and do not want to have in the By-laws.  They are the ones that have to live with the By-laws at the end of the day.