Guest Art Posted September 11, 2017 at 11:58 PM Report Share Posted September 11, 2017 at 11:58 PM Our organization's bylaws relies on Robert's Rules of Order in areas that our bylaws lack. They certainly lack in this area. We have a small group(12-15) active members in our group. We have heard rumors that a group of people are going to get enough to make a majority to join, in order to make a motion and get passed, sweeping changes that the current active group is strongly opposed to. Currently our bylaws state that you must attend 6 meetings in a rolling calendar year to have a vote on anything. We can see this group doing this to get what they want. Is there anything our current group can do to prevent this from happening? We thought about making an amendment to the bylaws that motions to these specific changes can only be brought by individuals who have been members 18 months. We don't think they would be that dedicated. Is this possible? Or is there a better solution? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hieu H. Huynh Posted September 12, 2017 at 01:57 AM Report Share Posted September 12, 2017 at 01:57 AM Get more members on your side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted September 12, 2017 at 02:15 AM Report Share Posted September 12, 2017 at 02:15 AM If you want to be highly particular about who becomes a member, you can do what some societies do, and require that prospective members be voted in by the existing members. Some particularly exclusive societies provide that a prospective member can be "blackballed" by a single negative vote. Of course this, or any other limitation on membership or voting rights would have to be done through a bylaws amendment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts