Bylaws status for a body entirely newly elected

[Nathan Zook]

This is a question regarding county party central committees organized in the state of Washington under https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=29A.80.030.  The code requires that an organizational meeting be held, but does not specify anything with respect to bylaws.  https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=29A.80.020, which addresses the state central committee, does specify that at its organizational meeting, the state central committee "adopt bylaws".

The question is: it is more proper to "adopt bylaws" at the organizational meeting of a body which is newly elected as a whole, or to consider that the previous bylaws carry over, and are to be amended?

 

 

Edited October 23, 2020 at 08:24 PM by Nathan Zook

[Atul Kapur]

This is a question about the application of Washington State law, is it not?

That being said, I don't think the committee is being "born again" at this organization meeting. It's still the SomeCounty OneParty Central Committee. [This is not and is not purported to be legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. In fact, it's probably best that you forget you even read it. Move along, nothing to see here.]

[Nathan Zook]

I am well aware that this is not the forum for legal advice.  We have significant decisions here in Washington state wherein the courts (including the state Supreme Court) have treated these central committees as if they were political parties and, applying strict scrutiny, more-or-less stripped the code of the force of law.  Which, combined with the lack of language in the statute, is my excuse to bring the issue up here...

[Gary Novosielski]

I have seen organizational meetings of elected bodies where a series of boilerplate resolutions (re)adopting the entire policy manual including the bylaws, confirming the official mailing address, confirming the official seal, and the like.  

Whether these are necessary, or required by law or regulation, or are merely custom, these practices are not required by RONR.  So if there's an explanation for them, it's not to be found within RONR's  pages.

[Josh Martin]

18 hours ago, Nathan Zook said:

This is a question regarding county party central committees organized in the state of Washington under https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=29A.80.030.  The code requires that an organizational meeting be held, but does not specify anything with respect to bylaws.  https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=29A.80.020, which addresses the state central committee, does specify that at its organizational meeting, the state central committee "adopt bylaws".

The question is: it is more proper to "adopt bylaws" at the organizational meeting of a body which is newly elected as a whole, or to consider that the previous bylaws carry over, and are to be amended?

The question is clearly the latter under RONR and the common parliamentary law, and indeed I would note that this is not simply the "more proper" action but is the only proper action. Bylaws are only adopted when the organization is initially created. The bylaws then have continuing force and effect for so long as the organization continues to exist, and the bylaws continue to "carry over" despite any intervening elections. If it is desired to change the bylaws, the bylaws may be amended through individual amendments or through a revision, but the organization cannot simply adopt new bylaws because the current bylaws still exist. If it is not desired to change the bylaws, no action needs to be taken in regard to the bylaws.

I have no idea whether the laws you cite change anything in this regard.

[Richard Brown]

Agreeing with all of the previous responses, it is my opinion that, first, this is ultimately a legal question involving interpretation of state statutes.

However, as a parliamentary matter, and according to RONR, I do not believe that the new committee is a new organization in the parliamentary sense. I see it as being no different than electing a new board of directors every two or four years.

I also note with interest the following quote from the statute regarding the State Central committee which makes direct reference to electing new officers in accordance with its bylaws and then goes on to state that the committee shall adopt bylaws among other things. I interpret that as indicating the existing bylaws do continue in effect but that the committee may adopt new bylaws or bylaws amendments. Here is a quote to that section:

”At its organizational meeting it shall elect its chair and vice chair, and such officers as its bylaws may provide, and adopt bylaws, rules, and regulations.”

The fact that the statute says that the committee shall elect its chair and vice chair and such other officers as it’s bylaws may provide clearly indicates that it is considered a continuing entity.  Otherwise, it would not already have bylaws providing for its officers.

I would also point out that both of those statutes are probably intended to cover state and county central committees of new political organizations meeting for the first time as well as existing political parties of long-standing.

 

[Nathan Zook]

On 10/24/2020 at 8:41 AM, Richard Brown said:

I would also point out that both of those statutes are probably intended to cover state and county central committees of new political organizations meeting for the first time as well as existing political parties of long-standing.

 

 

As is the case in the other state with which I am familiar, "major" political parties fall under different statues than "minor" ones.

 

Thanks to all who answered.  I reasoned that, like the US House of Representatives, we would be a new body.  In particular, since there is no higher authority, we are unlike an elected executive board.  But, I came here to learn, and I'll transmit the unanimous view of my seniors to the committee.