Guest SteveN Posted July 8, 2018 at 05:12 PM Report Share Posted July 8, 2018 at 05:12 PM I timely submitted a bylaw change to my convention leaving the Section number blank since I did not know where it would be placed in the bylaws or if other changes were adopted, etc., I could not anticipate. The parliamentarian ruled my submission defective because the numbering/ordering is left blank. Is this a fair ruling? It has no impact on the substance of the submission. In order for our convention to take up a "new" bylaw amendment from the floor, 100% approval is required. The ruling states that I need to get 100% support to "correct" the numbering in order to have the otherwise timely submission considered. This seem ludicrous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted July 8, 2018 at 05:45 PM Report Share Posted July 8, 2018 at 05:45 PM 34 minutes ago, Guest SteveN said: I timely submitted a bylaw change to my convention leaving the Section number blank since I did not know where it would be placed in the bylaws or if other changes were adopted, etc., I could not anticipate. The parliamentarian ruled my submission defective because the numbering/ordering is left blank. Is this a fair ruling? It has no impact on the substance of the submission. In order for our convention to take up a "new" bylaw amendment from the floor, 100% approval is required. The ruling states that I need to get 100% support to "correct" the numbering in order to have the otherwise timely submission considered. This seem ludicrous. You submitted a new section (stating exactly what it was to say) to be inserted into the bylaws, but failed to say where? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SteveN Posted July 9, 2018 at 03:58 AM Report Share Posted July 9, 2018 at 03:58 AM Correct Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted July 9, 2018 at 12:01 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2018 at 12:01 PM If we assume that your organization's rules empower its parliamentarian to make rulings of this kind (nothing in Robert's Rules of Order grants him such power), it may well be that his ruling was reasonable. Failure to specify in a requisite notice exactly where in the bylaws a proposed new section is to be inserted may render the notice ineffective, depending, I suppose, upon the particular facts involved. Under the rules in RONR, rulings of this kind must be made by the presiding officer during a meeting, and are appealable. I don't know if your organization's rules make any provision for appealing rulings made by its parliamentarian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SteveN Posted July 9, 2018 at 02:25 PM Report Share Posted July 9, 2018 at 02:25 PM Thank you for your interpretation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts