Bylaw Conflict

[Sidd M]

Hi All,

Context: I currently Chair the Senate within my organization, which serves to moderate the actions of the executive branch. The senate declares standing committees based on a list provided from our bylaws on an annual basis (as executive board members are elected annually, as well as senators). Appointments to those committees are then made by the President from the Executive Branch and the Senate has to consent to those appointments.

Issue: Within our bylaws, it spells out that the executive board consists of the President, Vice President, the Programming Chair, Political Affairs Chair, Academic Affairs Chair and Non-Traditional Affairs Chairperson. However, the list of standing committees does not define "Programming committee" in its list (see attached image). The executive branch's contention is that because our bylaws state  that the Senate has the purview to, "Establish and terminate SA Standing, Special and Ad-Hoc committees except as provided for in Section 9", the programming committee can therefore be declared and approved by the Senate.

Is the declaration and approval of the "programming committee" technically permissible in that case? 

 

[Josh Martin]

7 hours ago, Sidd M said:

Within our bylaws, it spells out that the executive board consists of the President, Vice President, the Programming Chair, Political Affairs Chair, Academic Affairs Chair and Non-Traditional Affairs Chairperson. However, the list of standing committees does not define "Programming committee" in its list (see attached image).

The executive branch's contention is that because our bylaws state  that the Senate has the purview to, "Establish and terminate SA Standing, Special and Ad-Hoc committees except as provided for in Section 9", the programming committee can therefore be declared and approved by the Senate.

Is the declaration and approval of the "programming committee" technically permissible in that case? 

It is ultimately up to the organization to interpret its own bylaws. It appears the interpretation offered by the executive branch is that the rule which provides that "the Senate has the purview to, "Establish and terminate SA Standing, Special and Ad-Hoc committees except as provided for in Section 9"" means that the organization is required to have at least the standing committees provided for in Section 9, but that additional standing committees may be established if desired. This seems like a reasonable interpretation.

I would also note that there is no doubt that the "Programming Chair" exists since the bylaws specifically provide that this person is a member of the Executive Board. As a result, it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to suggest that the Programming Committee exists, since presumably that is what the Programming Chair is the chair of.

In the long run, it would probably be prudent to amend the bylaws to 1) add the Programming Committee to the list of committees, and 2) clarify the rule in question.

Edited August 23, 2020 at 02:41 PM by Josh Martin