Guest K. Wilson Posted October 13, 2015 at 01:26 PM Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 at 01:26 PM Our by-laws can be changed/amended/added/etc. as long as the rule is proposed by: 1.At least 4 members in good standing or 2. The officers of the society and then published and voted by the membership. 4 Members submitted a by-law change and the officers took it and added an entirely opposite 2nd option creating a vote on Option 1 and Option 2. We do not think they can manipulate it like that. If they wanted an opposite rule, they should put it up on its own merits - not create 2 options. Also, we do not think they should be allowed to change what members submit. Can you help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gödel Fan Posted October 13, 2015 at 01:55 PM Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 at 01:55 PM It is up to your organization to interpret its own bylaw provisions. I can say, though, that according to what you've said, there's nothing wrong with the officers (I'm assuming your organization knows what that means) offering their own amendment after 4 members have submitted one. Clearly, unless your bylaws specifically provide otherwise, they can't change what has been submitted, although the assembly may be able to amend it within the scope of notice. If there is some attempt here to require members to choose between Option 1 and Option 2, as opposed to voting on each one separately, then that would certainly appear improper (again, unless you have a rule allowing it). Has the original proposal been published as required? If so, what's going to happen, or should happen, is that someone, probably one of the 4 who submitted the change, will move the adoption of that change at a general membership meeting (unless, of course, you have some sort of asynchronous voting). Then it will be seconded, debated, and voted on. Your officers (who are unlikely to be in that capacity at the meeting) will not be able to amend it on the floor to say something opposite due to scope of notice. Their proposal, if it has been published as required, can also be moved. Each one either passes or fails - you can't put the membership in the position of being forced to amend the bylaws one way or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest K. Wilson Posted October 13, 2015 at 02:04 PM Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 at 02:04 PM They took the by-law that 4 members submitted and changed it. They added a 2nd option, forcing a vote on either Option 1 or Option 2. I think they certainly have the right to present an alternate but it needs to be its own by-law on its own merits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted October 13, 2015 at 06:36 PM Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 at 06:36 PM They took the by-law that 4 members submitted and changed it. They added a 2nd option, forcing a vote on either Option 1 or Option 2. I think they certainly have the right to present an alternate but it needs to be its own by-law on its own merits. I agree, but with the caveat they they could also propose an amendment to the original proposal at the meeting if it is within the scope of the notice of the original proposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gödel Fan Posted October 13, 2015 at 08:49 PM Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 at 08:49 PM If they forced a vote between 1 and 2, they are trying to force the assembly to amend the bylaws in one way or another, and not leaving the option of saying "no." That's absurd, and a violation of not only RONR, but also fundamental principles of parliamentary law (unless your bylaws provide for such an action). I also see, from what you've said, absolutely no authority from them to change the proposal at all, let alone in this manner. I agree that they would have to make their own proposal. Mr. Brown above is, of course, correct that the 4 who want a different amendment could move to amend at the meeting, but if the effect is the opposite of the original proposal, it is unlikely to be within the scope of notice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.