Past Precedent Set

[keefe]

It was recently explained to me that our Church Council can have special meetings without prior notification or agenda because of a "past precedent" that had been set.  The meetings however would require a quorum, the concept is to grab a group of the Church Council members after a church service (all who are available) and have meeting on urgent/not-so-urgent matters.  Our bylaws don't mention anything about precedent nor do they allow for special meetings of our Church Council (we plan to present additions to the bylaws which allow for this if passed).  Can someone offer some advice to this situation?  I have looked in RONR but am unable to find anything that may pertain to past precedent.

 

Thank you.

[Richard Brown]

For openers, you cannot have special meetings at all unless they are authorized in the bylaws.

 

Second, unless your bylaws specifically dispense with a notice requirement, which is doubtful, previous notice must be given to the membership of all special meetings

 

Custom (precedent) can be followed so long as nobody points out that it conflicts with a written rule, whether that rule is in your bylaws, special rules, or your parliamentary authority (which we hope and assume is RONR).

 

Edited to add:  This is part of what RONR says about special meetings on pages 91 and 92:

 

"Special Meeting

A special meeting (or called meeting) is a separate session of a society held at a time different from that of any regular meeting, and convened only to consider one or more items of business specified in the call of the meeting. Notice of the time, place, and purpose of the meeting, clearly and specifically describing the subject matter of the motions or items of business to be brought up, must be sent to all members a reasonable number of days in advance. The reason for special [page 92] meetings is to deal with matters that may arise between regular meetings and that require action by the society before the next regular meeting, or to dedicate an entire session to one or more particular matters.* As in the case of a regular meeting, the session of a special meeting in an ordinary society is normally concluded in a single meeting, unless the assembly at the special meeting schedules an adjourned meeting (see below).

Special meetings can properly be called only (a) as authorized in the bylaws (see p. 576); or ( b ) when authorized by the assembly itself, as part of formal disciplinary procedures, for purposes of conducting a trial and determining a punishment (see footnote, p. 661)."   (Emphasis mine).

[Edgar Guest]

Second, unless your bylaws specifically dispense with a notice requirement, which is doubtful, previous notice must be given to the membership of all special meetings

And, for special meetings of the Council, that would be notice to all Council members, not the general membership of the association (uh, church).

 

Custom (precedent) can be followed so long as nobody points out that it conflicts with a written rule, whether that rule is in your bylaws, special rules, or your parliamentary authority (which we hope and assume is RONR).

Such customs can be followed but if they conflict with the rules (whether or not anyone raises a point of order), they shouldn't be.

[Richard Brown]

And, for special meetings of the Council, that would be notice to all Council members, not the general membership of the association (uh, church).

Agreed.  I was a little sloppy with my wording.

 

Such customs can be followed but if they conflict with the rules (whether or not anyone raises a point of order), they shouldn't be.

Well, if a point of order is raised that the custom violates a written rule, the custom "falls to the ground", per RONR, right?  (RONR, page 19).

 

Edited to add, from page 19 or RONR:

"Custom

In some organizations, a particular practice may sometimes come to be followed as a matter of established custom so that it is treated practically as if it were prescribed by a rule. If there is no contrary provision in the parliamentary authority or written rules of the organization, the established custom should be adhered to unless the assembly, by a majority vote, agrees in a particular instance to do otherwise. However, if a customary practice is or becomes in conflict with the parliamentary authority or any written rule, and a Point of Order (23) citing the conflict is raised at any time, the custom falls to the ground, and the conflicting provision in the parliamentary authority or written rule must thereafter be complied with. If it is then desired to follow the former practice, a special rule of order (or, in appropriate circumstances, a standing rule or a bylaw provision) can be added or amended to incorporate it."

[Edgar Guest]

Well, if a point of order is raised that the custom violates a written rule, the custom "falls to the ground", per RONR, right?  (RONR, page 19).

 

Yes. I just didn't want Mr. (?) keefe  (Keefe?) to think it was okay to follow such a custom until someone raised a point of order.

[Dan Honemann]

Custom or no custom, a board (the Church Council in this case) can transact business only in a regular or properly called meeting of which every board member has been notified, unless the bylaws provide otherwise (RONR, 11th ed., pp. 486-87).

[keefe]

Gentlemen,

Thank you for your comments.  Just for clarification (for myself) the point of order would/could only be raised in a meeting, since our bylaws don't allow for the special meeting (which is what was attempted) to take place a point of order cannot be raised since no meeting existed.  I hope that makes sense.  

[Tom Coronite]

True, but at one of these informal gatherings you could certainly notify them of your intent to raise the point of order at the next meeting. (For whatever that's worth)

[Richard Brown]

Gentlemen,

Thank you for your comments.  Just for clarification (for myself) the point of order would/could only be raised in a meeting, since our bylaws don't allow for the special meeting (which is what was attempted) to take place a point of order cannot be raised since no meeting existed.  I hope that makes sense.  

Well, the next time they have one of these illegal "special meetings", raise a point of order (if you are a member of the council) that the meeting is out of order and illegal since it violates they bylaws and the provisions of  RONR.  If the chair rules against you, be prepared to appeal (and have someone to second the appeal).  And have others prepared to vote that the procedure does indeed violate the rules.

[Edgar Guest]

Well, the next time they have one of these illegal "special meetings", raise a point of order . . . 

 

I'm not sure a point of order can be properly raised at a "meeting" that isn't a meeting. I would follow 1stChurch's advice.

[George Mervosh]

I'm not sure a point of order can be properly raised at a "meeting" that isn't a meeting.

 

I'm sure it can, since the book provides no other procedure.

[Dan Honemann]

I'm sure it can, since the book provides no other procedure.

 

Well, I suppose that anyone present at a meeting that is not a legitimate meeting can point out the fact that it isn't a legitimate meeting.

[George Mervosh]

Well, I suppose that anyone present at a meeting that is not a legitimate meeting can point out the fact that it isn't a legitimate meeting.

 

When I figure out the difference between a point of order and pointing out the fact, I'll get back to you. 

[Dan Honemann]

When I figure out the difference between a point of order and pointing out the fact, I'll get back to you. 

 

No ruling can or need be made in response to the latter.

[Edgar Guest]

When I figure out the difference between a point of order and pointing out the fact, I'll get back to you.

 

The difference is that points of order can only be raised at meetings. And this gathering isn't a meeting. Raising a point of order would lend the gathering a certain air of legitimacy (just as, in a recent post, rescinding a motion that's suspected of being out of order gives the motion the appearance of being valid).

[Gary Novosielski]

It was recently explained to me that our Church Council can have special meetings without prior notification or agenda because of a "past precedent" that had been set.  The meetings however would require a quorum, the concept is to grab a group of the Church Council members after a church service (all who are available) and have meeting on urgent/not-so-urgent matters.  Our bylaws don't mention anything about precedent nor do they allow for special meetings of our Church Council (we plan to present additions to the bylaws which allow for this if passed).  Can someone offer some advice to this situation?  I have looked in RONR but am unable to find anything that may pertain to past precedent.

 

Thank you.

 

Past precedent does not allow for blatant violations of the rules in the bylaws or your parliamentary authority.

 

RONR requires that special meetings, when they are permitted, can only deal with business that was stated in the call of the meeting, which must be sent to all members a reasonable time in advance of the meeting (required notice).

 

And it prohibits them entirely when the bylaws do not authorize them.

 

Anything that was adopted at these improperly-called meetings, regardless of how long the "precedent" may have been, is null and void.  Anyone who took action based on one of these decisions did so without proper authorization, and may find themselves being held personally responsible.

[Steven Britton]

Agreed.  I was a little sloppy with my wording.

 

Well, if a point of order is raised that the custom violates a written rule, the custom "falls to the ground", per RONR, right?  (RONR, page 19).

 

Edited to add, from page 19 or RONR:

"Custom

In some organizations, a particular practice may sometimes come to be followed as a matter of established custom so that it is treated practically as if it were prescribed by a rule. If there is no contrary provision in the parliamentary authority or written rules of the organization, the established custom should be adhered to unless the assembly, by a majority vote, agrees in a particular instance to do otherwise. However, if a customary practice is or becomes in conflict with the parliamentary authority or any written rule, and a Point of Order (23) citing the conflict is raised at any time, the custom falls to the ground, and the conflicting provision in the parliamentary authority or written rule must thereafter be complied with. If it is then desired to follow the former practice, a special rule of order (or, in appropriate circumstances, a standing rule or a bylaw provision) can be added or amended to incorporate it."

 

No analysis concerning precedent is complete without a citation from RONR; p. 251 (line 28) - p. 252 (line 17). In particular emphasis should be placed on the latter page (lines 10 - 17) that states:

 

"If an assembly is or becomes dissatisfied with a precedent, it may be overruled, in whole or in part, by a later ruling of the chair or a decision of the assembly in an appeal in a similar situation, which will then create a new precedent. Alternatively, adoption, rescission, or amendment (35) of a bylaw provision, special rule of order, standing rule, or other motion may alter the rule or policy on which the unsatisfactory precedent was based."