Notice for Proposing Special Rules of Order When Required by By-law Provision

[mjhmjh]

My organization only meets twice a year. To accommodate the unique needs of each biannual meeting, the by-laws state that "the Secretary must propose special rules of order for each biannual meeting." Adopting special rules of order normally requires a 2/3 vote and notice. However, since the by-laws require that he or she propose special rules of order, need the Secretary give notice? Additionally, can notice for special rules of order merely summarize the proposed special rules of order, rather than include their exact text?

[Bruce Lages]

I don't see how the secretary being the originator of proposed special rules of order has any bearing on RONR's requirement for prior notice. Presumably, if the secretary is sending out the notice of meeting, inclusion of prior notice for special rules of order would not be a problem.

A summary of any and all proposed special rules of order would be sufficient provided that the summary clearly and completely explains the purpose of each proposed rule. See RONR, p. 122, ll. 22-27.

[mjhmjh]

Just now, Bruce Lages said:

I don't see how the secretary being the originator of proposed special rules of order has any bearing on RONR's requirement for prior notice. Presumably, if the secretary is sending out the notice of meeting, inclusion of prior notice for special rules of order would not be a problem.

A summary of any and all proposed special rules of order would be sufficient provided that the summary clearly and completely explains the purpose of each proposed rule. See RONR, p. 122, ll. 22-27.

Thank you

[Shmuel Gerber]

1 hour ago, mjhmjh said:

My organization only meets twice a year. To accommodate the unique needs of each biannual meeting, the by-laws state that "the Secretary must propose special rules of order for each biannual meeting." Adopting special rules of order normally requires a 2/3 vote and notice. However, since the by-laws require that he or she propose special rules of order, need the Secretary give notice? Additionally, can notice for special rules of order merely summarize the proposed special rules of order, rather than include their exact text?

It seems to me that such "special rules of order for each biannual meeting" are directly analogous to standing rules at a convention, since they apply to one session only, and therefore the votes required to adopt, suspend, or amend such rules would be the same as for the standing rules at a convention.

[Bruce Lages]

Perhaps the OP could respond and tell us whether the organization's usual practice is that the special rules of order proposed by the secretary and then adopted are applied only to the semi-annual meeting at which they are adopted.

[mjhmjh]

6 hours ago, Bruce Lages said:

Perhaps the OP could respond and tell us whether the organization's usual practice is that the special rules of order proposed by the secretary and then adopted are applied only to the semi-annual meeting at which they are adopted.

The usual practice is that they are applied only to the biannual meeting at which they are adopted, the reasoning being that the by-laws state "each biannual meeting."

[mjhmjh]

7 hours ago, Shmuel Gerber said:

It seems to me that such "special rules of order for each biannual meeting" are directly analogous to standing rules at a convention, since they apply to one session only, and therefore the votes required to adopt, suspend, or amend such rules would be the same as for the standing rules at a convention.

Based upon my reading of the section in RONR on standing rules for a convention, there wouldn't need to be notice, but the rules could only be adopted by a 2/3 vote. Is that right?

[Dan Honemann]

5 hours ago, mjhmjh said:

Based upon my reading of the section in RONR on standing rules for a convention, there wouldn't need to be notice, but the rules could only be adopted by a 2/3 vote. Is that right?

Well, any convention standing rule of the kind described on page 620, lines 4-14, will require a two-thirds vote for its adoption. You're right about the fact that no notice is required.

[Bruce Lages]

2 hours ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

Well, any convention standing rule of the kind described on page 620, lines 4-14, will require a two-thirds vote for its adoption. You're right about the fact that no notice is required.

RONR appears to recommend a prior notice of some sort, even if the 'prior' is not very much removed from the meeting - "A copy of the 'Proposed Standing Rules of the Convention' that the committee is to recommend - usually printed in the official program - should be handed to each person when he registers." (p. 618, ll. 27-30). It seems that the intent is to have the proposed rules known to the delegates as least prior to the meeting at which they are to be voted on. Something similar might be appropriate, even if not required, for mjhmjh's organization.

[Dan Honemann]

1 hour ago, Bruce Lages said:

RONR appears to recommend a prior notice of some sort, even if the 'prior' is not very much removed from the meeting - "A copy of the 'Proposed Standing Rules of the Convention' that the committee is to recommend - usually printed in the official program - should be handed to each person when he registers." (p. 618, ll. 27-30). It seems that the intent is to have the proposed rules known to the delegates as least prior to the meeting at which they are to be voted on. Something similar might be appropriate, even if not required, for mjhmjh's organization.

Yes, you are certainly right about this recommendation. I suppose what I should have said, to be more precise, is that previous notice, as defined on page 4, lines 21-27, and on pages 121-124, is not a requirement.