Guest karl Posted January 28, 2015 at 09:24 PM Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 at 09:24 PM I believe our organization passes a motion at our last quarterly meeting that runs contrary to a section of our constitution and two sections in our bylaws. I can't seem to find the answer to how one should go about getting rid of this motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 28, 2015 at 09:40 PM Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 at 09:40 PM See p. 251, Paragraph (a). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hieu H. Huynh Posted January 28, 2015 at 09:40 PM Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 at 09:40 PM Raise a point of order at the next meeting that the adopted motion is in violation of the bylaws. The chair will rule on the point of order. The ruling of the chair may be appealed. See RONR 11th ed., pp. 247-255 on Point of Order and pp. 255-260 on Appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 28, 2015 at 09:47 PM Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 at 09:47 PM Raise a point of order ... The ruling of the chair may be appealed.One would hope not - p. 256, paragraph 2( b ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted January 28, 2015 at 09:52 PM Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 at 09:52 PM One would hope not - p. 256, paragraph 2( b ) Well, with all due respect to Guest_karl, there's no indication that there "cannot possibly be two reasonable opinions" in this instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hieu H. Huynh Posted January 28, 2015 at 09:53 PM Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 at 09:53 PM One would hope not - p. 256, paragraph 2( b ) It would depend on the motion and how it conflicts with the bylaws. There may or may not be two reasonable opinions. It could be a matter of interpretation of the bylaws, which is ultimately up to the organization to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest karl Posted January 28, 2015 at 10:21 PM Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 at 10:21 PM How do organizations typically resolve disagreements over interpretation of the bylaws? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted January 28, 2015 at 10:24 PM Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 at 10:24 PM How do organizations typically resolve disagreements over interpretation of the bylaws? They vote. Majority rules. Then, hopefully, the bylaws are amended to remove the ambiguity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted January 28, 2015 at 11:58 PM Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 at 11:58 PM Raise a point of order at the next meeting that the adopted motion is in violation of the bylaws. The chair will rule on the point of order. The ruling of the chair may be appealed. See RONR 11th ed., pp. 247-255 on Point of Order and pp. 255-260 on Appeal. One would hope not - p. 256, paragraph 2( b ) Well, with all due respect to Guest_karl, there's no indication that there "cannot possibly be two reasonable opinions" in this instance.John, I agree with Edgar and Hieu. I don't see any indication that the possible conflict with the bylaws is so clear cut that there cannot be more than one interpretation. We don't even know what the alleged conflict is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 29, 2015 at 12:08 AM Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 at 12:08 AM Yeah, perhaps I am too pessimistic, but "contrary to a section of our constitution and two sections in our bylaws" seemed like a relatively safe bet. But, of course, it will all be up to guest Karl's association to sort out. At least he knows how to raise a point of order now, if he has done his RONR reading homework. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted January 29, 2015 at 07:13 PM Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 at 07:13 PM How do organizations typically resolve disagreements over interpretation of the bylaws? Usually via the motion to Appeal from the Decision of the Chair. Disagreements typically occur when the chair rules that something or other does or does not comply with the bylaws. If there is no disagreement with the ruling, it stands as a precedent for future interpretations of the bylaws. If there is disagreement with the decision, someone will make (and someone else will second) a motion to Appeal. At that point the membership may debate, and vote on whether to sustain the chair's decision or not. If a majority votes to overrule the chair's decision (i.e., votes No on the motion to sustain), then it is that precedent which governs future interpretation. But in any situation where the bylaws appear to be ambiguous, it is best to amend them to specify clearly what they mean to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.