Guest Woboot100 Posted April 4, 2015 at 10:40 PM Report Share Posted April 4, 2015 at 10:40 PM Since our by-laws must conform to a wide variety of authorities and legal standards, we have a standing committee (call it a "by-laws committee") whose sole job is to make certain that what our by-laws (ours go well over 100 pages) confirm to the standards and laws under which we operate. Part of that committee's charge is to take proposed changes and make certain that they are properly worded and meet all standards. It is also not allowed to disapprove of a proposed change, only to shape its language within some very narrow bounds and send it to the Assembly with any appropriate commentary. I have the following situation as chair of the Assembly. The by-laws committee has identified a place where there is a conflict with an outside authority and has prepared a motion to resolve that conflict. At the same time, another duly constituted authority in the organization has submitted a change on exactly the same topic based on its analysis of the conflict. This motion is in considerable conflict with the committee's own motion. The committee's charge is that it must forward to the assembly the change submitted by the other authority and I have been informed that the "by-laws committee" has shaped the second motion into proper language for submission to the assembly. However, neither of these motions were ready in time to meet our deadline for submissions from committees to be included on the agenda. At the same time, I have also been notified that there MAY be a motion coming from the floor on the subject of the conflict which will direct the committee to prepare a motion to address the conflict in a particular manner . . . which will constitute still a third approach to the topic. This motion to issue instructions is certain of passage if it is submitted. That motion, however, will ricochet into another section of the by-laws and create a conflict of considerable significance. I am told that the people who may motion from the floor are absolutely committed to the wording of the motion and, as I say, it is clear that they have majority backing. Thus, I could easily have a committee that will, next meeting, be presenting three motions in conflict with one another since our by-laws tie their hands: they may not turn down a proposed amendment to our by-laws but must get it ready for proper presentation to assembly. And our by-laws require all motions submitted or formed by the by-laws committee to come to the floor. Any thoughts as to what I should do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hieu H. Huynh Posted April 4, 2015 at 11:14 PM Report Share Posted April 4, 2015 at 11:14 PM "If notice is given of several amendments which conflict so that all cannot be given effect, the chair should arrange them in a logical order, much as in the case of filling blanks ([section] 12), generally taking the least inclusive amendment first and the most inclusive last so that the last one adopted is given effect. Such arrangement of the amendments can be altered by the assembly by a majority vote without debate." (RONR 11th ed., p. 593, l. 35 to p. 594, l. 7) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Woboot100 Posted April 5, 2015 at 03:15 PM Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 at 03:15 PM 1. Would not the directions from the Assembly as a whole for the committee to construct a motion following certain guidelines supersede the two, as of yet, unpublished amendments? 2. Since these directions force a contradiction upon the by-laws, in a manner of speaking, is there any ruling I can make that points this out and forces an action upon the Assembly to not create the contradiction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Woboot100 Posted April 5, 2015 at 03:17 PM Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 at 03:17 PM By force, I mean that the motion would be postponed in some sense until the contradiction is resolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted April 5, 2015 at 05:20 PM Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 at 05:20 PM 1. Would not the directions from the Assembly as a whole for the committee to construct a motion following certain guidelines supersede the two, as of yet, unpublished amendments?No, I don't think so. The assembly's instructions were to construct a motion following certain guidelines. This doesn't prevent the committee from also recommending other motions. Additionally, since you say your bylaws require that the committee forwards all motions it receives, it wouldn't matter even if the assembly had intended to try to stop the committee from forwarding the other amendments - since this would violate the bylaws.2. Since these directions force a contradiction upon the by-laws, in a manner of speaking, is there any ruling I can make that points this out and forces an action upon the Assembly to not create the contradiction?I think you can and should point out the contradiction that would be created, but you cannot force the assembly to fix it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Woboot100 Posted April 6, 2015 at 02:40 AM Report Share Posted April 6, 2015 at 02:40 AM Thank you all. This has been most enlightening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.