Bylaws amendments and ballot elections timeline

[Guest ViceChair]

Greetings! 

Our Faculty Senate is preparing to vote on critical amendments to our bylaws regarding the eligibility requirements for serving on the university rank, tenure and promotion review committee. We are experiencing pushback at every turn, most often by using the current Constitution and Bylaws to do so. Would appreciate some clarity about how to proceed. I apologize in advance for the length, but wanted to make sure you have full context.

Please see the language regarding this process from our Constitution of the University Faculty:

Article IX Amendments
Section 1. Amendments to this Constitution or changes to its Bylaws may be proposed by the Faculty Senate by a motion passed by the majority of the members present and voting at a meeting or by a petition signed by twenty percent of the members of the Faculty Association.

Section 2. A properly proposed amendment or change to the Faculty Constitution or change to the Bylaws shall be reviewed by the Faculty Constitution Committee and the Faculty Senate shall report the amendment or change in Bylaws and its recommendations at least four weeks before the meeting at which the amendment or change in Bylaws will be considered by the Faculty Association.

Section 3. An amendment to the Faculty Constitution is adopted when it is approved by a two-thirds vote of the ballots cast by the Faculty Association and by the President. A change to the Bylaws of the Faculty Constitution is adopted when the Faculty Association, with a two-thirds vote of the ballots cast, approves it.

The motion to make these amendments was properly made, seconded and supported by unanimous vote at our October 17th Senate meeting, at which time the Chair of the Constitution Committee was present. The Senate formerly forwarded this recommendation to the Constitution Committee on October 31 and requested an expedited review of this recommendation to ensure that there would be time for the faculty body to vote on it this semester. Although our bylaws state that the Constitution Committee must keep the Senate informed of their progress, the committee did not provide it's recommendation at our November 21 meeting, in writing or verbally, despite repeated requests (we believe this is intentional). However, in preparation for this meeting, the Senate informed the faculty body of this matter by placing it on the agenda, describing the issue in our correspondence to the faculty and provided a copy of the original motion to amend the bylaws in meeting documents which faculty review prior to our meetings. However, during this meeting, the Constitution Committee did not clearly state its recommendation.  After a meeting with the Senate to get clarity on the committee's stance, the Constitution Committee submitted it's formal recommendation to amend the bylaws earlier this week (12/11/19). 

Per the bylaws, the Senate Chair notified the Elections Committee of this recommendation and requested a ballot vote to begin and end before our faculty leave for Winter Break next Friday. The Chair of the Elections committee responded to indicate that per the language of the bylaws, we have not met the timeline requirements for such a vote.

B. Responsibilities of Standing Committees of the Faculty Senate

7. The Faculty Elections Committee
a. To conduct balloting of faculty when requested by the Faculty Senate and it shall conduct the elections of faculty representatives from the faculty at-large for internal and external governance structures, as required by the Faculty Constitution.

b. To conduct, prior to May, the election of persons from the faculty at-large for all Faculty Senate Committees (The persons to be elected include the elected members of the Faculty Elections Committee itself). Each Faculty Senate standing committee shall elect its own chair.

c. To conduct balloting of members of the Faculty Association when necessary.

The challenge is (as was the case when the motion was made in October) that a vote on this is required before the semester ends as the University Rank, Tenure and Promotion Committee will receive their assignments at the end of this month and will begin working over the Winter Break in January. The amendments will specifically make provisions for departments that do not have full professors to appoint the most senior associate professor in the department to serve on this Committee. In the absence of this amendment, at least five departments (out of 18) would not have any representation, which threatens shared governance in this process. Our Senate Executive Committee contends that due to the critical nature of the recommended change, the potential impact on the fairness of the tenure and promotion review process and the limited time available for the faculty body to vote by ballot (we do not have any provision for electronic voting), we should be able to require the Elections Committee to proceed.

Please note that, with respect to elections called by the Senate, the bylaws read as follows:

C. Rules and Procedures of Committees of the Faculty Senate

11. The Faculty Elections Committee shall conduct balloting of the members of the Faculty Association on request of the Senate.

12. A Faculty Constitution Committee shall be established by the Faculty Senate, and shall meet at least monthly whenever proposed changes to the Constitution of the Bowie State University Faculty and/or its Bylaws are under consideration. The committee shall keep the Chair of the Faculty Senate informed of progress, and shall strive to make its recommendations within one month after receiving a proposed change. The Faculty Senate shall inform the Faculty Association of the recommendations; after the meeting, the Faculty Senate shall direct the Elections Committee to conduct balloting on the proposal.

The bylaws also provide a specific timeline for the election of at-large members, but describes this as aspirational. We contend that the same logic should apply to the rules for the 4-week window for the amendment to the bylaws: 

The Faculty Elections Committee shall conduct, prior to May each year, the election of faculty members at-large to serve as representatives of the faculty in internal and external governance structures and on committees using the following Procedures:

However, at the end of the list of procedures for at-large representative elections, it reads:

Deadlines in these election procedures are meant to be guidelines; elections shall not be invalid when circumstances prevent the deadlines in these procedures from being met.

So...here are my questions:

1. Do we have to abide by the 4-week "notice" window to conduct the ballot vote of the faculty?
2. If so, when does that clock start? Doees the notification to the faculty body by way of the agenda item and written motion documentation back in November count as the initiation of this 4-week window?
3. Re: the adherence to the timeline, can the language re: the timeline for the at-large elections be inferred to relate to all election procedures or just that of the at-large representatives?
4. Is there any way that our Senate can legally execute this ballot vote before the semester ends next Friday?!?!?

Here is the specific language the Elections Committee Chair used to challenge to our request:

Regarding an election on the proposed change to the Bylaws, I believe that the timeline does not match the requirements in the Constitution. I refer to the Constitution of the Bowie State University Faculty:

Article IX

Amendments

Section 2. A properly proposed amendment or change to the Faculty Constitution or change to the Bylaws shall be reviewed by the Faculty Constitution Committee and the Faculty Senate shall report the amendment or change in Bylaws and its recommendations at least four weeks before the meeting at which the amendment or change in Bylaws will be considered by the Faculty Association.

This requires (1) The Constitution Committee sends the amendment or change to the Bylaws to the Faculty Senate.

(2) The Faculty Senate considers the matter and determines its recommendations.

(3) The Faculty Senate publishes the amendment or change to the Bylaws, along with its recommendations.

(4) After at least four weeks, a Faculty Association meeting considers the matter.

[Rob Elsman]

Not much, if anything, of the original post seems to have anything to do with RONR (11th ed.). I suggest the Faculty Senate employs the services of a professional parliamentarian to consult about the matters raised.

[Atul Kapur]

Agreed. This seems to all be about interpretation of the Constitution and Bylaws, which is up to the Association itself to do. A more carefree person might have said, "They're your rules, you tell us."

I support the recommendation that they seek the assistance of a professional parliamentarian.

[Rob Elsman]

I know of no carefree person who would use a comma instead of a semicolon. 😉

[Gary Novosielski]

I think the more carefree the person, the more likely they are to use neither, and go for the em-dash instead.