What motions are necessary to be reflected in our bylaws?

[jcool]

Hello all, first time poster. I am the regent (chairman) of a Professional Fraternity in which RONR governs our meetings. To give you some context, until my term as regent, Robert's Rules were not being followed, even though it is stated in our bylaws that RONR shall govern our meetings. In previous years, I guess the exec board just 'did' all of the changes that they deemed necessary. As such, we are experiencing growing pains as we learn that we all have the capacity to conduct business and foster change in our organization, which both excites me and stresses the hell out of me since I have so many people looking to me for answers.

Anyways, my question is in the title; which motions are necessary to be reflected in our bylaws and which motions can we just, well, do? It is stated in our bylaws that any changes to the bylaws requires a 3/4 affirmative vote of the members present. This now presents the issue at hand - if a motion must be put into our bylaws, it reduces the chance that it will pass by 50% (from 51% to 75%). Thus, it seems pertinent to NOT reflect some changes within our bylaws, which seems dangerous as future generations of members may forget what business we conducted. Our bylaws do not 100% reflect everything that we do, so many members argue that we may just pass a motion and then simply do the action, and it will become 'tradition'. My worry with this is that future members will not remember what took place, and the motion may not be adhered to. 

Should our organization create a separate document for motions that do not seem appropriate to include in our bylaws? Who shall determine what will be appropriate for our bylaws and what will be reflected in this new document? Is this a common issue?

Thank you for your time.

[Shmuel Gerber]

I think you may find it helpful to read paragraphs 2:8–2:9 in the 12th edition of RONR (Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised) regarding the purpose of bylaws, and 2:23 regarding the purpose of standing rules.

They should both be maintained and updated by the secretary whenever they are amended, and combined into a single booklet for reference by members in the future.

[Atul Kapur]

7 hours ago, jcool said:

Our bylaws do not 100% reflect everything that we do, so many members argue that we may just pass a motion and then simply do the action, and it will become 'tradition'.

Any motion that is in conflict with the bylaws is null and void. Same with any "tradition "(RONR uses the term "custom").

In other words, you cannot use motions to circumvent what is stated in your bylaws.

[Joshua Katz]

10 hours ago, jcool said:

Anyways, my question is in the title; which motions are necessary to be reflected in our bylaws and which motions can we just, well, do? It is stated in our bylaws that any changes to the bylaws requires a 3/4 affirmative vote of the members present. This now presents the issue at hand - if a motion must be put into our bylaws, it reduces the chance that it will pass by 50% (from 51% to 75%).

I think this organization may have some confusion about the conduct of business. The vast majority of actions taken by an organization have nothing to do with amending the bylaws. But can you refine your question at all? What sorts of things do you have in mind?

10 hours ago, jcool said:

Thus, it seems pertinent to NOT reflect some changes within our bylaws, which seems dangerous as future generations of members may forget what business we conducted.

This is why you have minutes (that reflect what was done, not what was said, in part so that you can find what was done easily) and, as Mr. Gerber mentioned, standing rules. 

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

It sounds as though your members would benefit from observing some meeting and societies that are accustomed to using RONR effectively or retaining a parliamentarian to get you through this rough spot of getting used to it.