Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Bylaws vs Special Rules of Order


Tomm

Recommended Posts

If suspension of the rule is a concern, then it would be wise to make sure that any rule of order placed in the bylaws actually qualifies as a rule of order (see RONR, 2:14 for the definition of a rule of order). Otherwise, a bylaw rule will have to allow for its own suspension. Also, a rule of order may be more difficult to amend if placed in the bylaws, if your bylaws specify a procedure for their amendment that is more stringent than RONR's procedure for amending a special rule of order (RONR, 2:22).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2022 at 10:13 AM, Bruce Lages said:

If suspension of the rule is a concern, then it would be wise to make sure that any rule of order placed in the bylaws actually qualifies as a rule of order (see RONR, 2:14 for the definition of a rule of order)

This is where my confusion kicks-in! Seems like the only mentions in RONR regarding what a special rule of order is, is if you want to change the rules for debate, specifying which procedures in small boards you use or not use and the allowable use of a consent agenda?

I'm sure there are many others but I just can't seem to differentiate what they might be! It would be great if you could provide a few more examples which may help me get by brain around the difference!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might try reading through RONR, Section 25 which deals with the motion Suspend the Rules, to see the scope of this motion. Pay particular attention to 25:7-13 which describe the rules of order (and other rules) that cannot be suspended. Other than those exceptions, most of the procedural rules in RONR can be suspended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2022 at 10:45 AM, Tomm said:

Are there pro's and con's as to when or why you should establish a rule in a bylaw or when you should just make it a special rule of order? 

Generally speaking, I would say that if a rule is in the nature of a rule of order, the rule should be adopted as a special rule of order. Placing such rules in the bylaws has no advantage that I can think of, and may only lead to confusion.

The only exception, in my view, is if the rule's subject matter is such that it can only be placed in the bylaws, such as rules pertaining to the setting of dues, the election or removal of members or officers, or amending the bylaws.

On 2/21/2022 at 10:45 AM, Tomm said:

The vote requirements to suspend either one seem to be the same 2/3rd's?

Generally, yes, a rule of order may be suspended by a 2/3 vote. (And in any event, whether the rule is located in the bylaws does not change the threshold for suspension.)

On 2/21/2022 at 11:27 AM, Tomm said:

This is where my confusion kicks-in! Seems like the only mentions in RONR regarding what a special rule of order is, is if you want to change the rules for debate, specifying which procedures in small boards you use or not use and the allowable use of a consent agenda?

Yes, I am in agreement that the rules you list here are in the nature of rules of order and that such rules should be adopted as special rules of order, not rules in the bylaws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2022 at 12:07 PM, Tomm said:

One last question!...Would it be correct that, regarding the establishment of a committee, if you were to specify that the board chair would select the chair of the committee and the chair of the committee would select its members, that should be a special rule of order rather than a bylaw?

It depends. How was the committee in question established? If the committee is established in the bylaws, then rules pertaining to the selection of the committee's chair and members should also be in the bylaws.

It should also be noted that the sort of rule you describe could not be suspended, unless the rule provides for its own suspension.

Edited by Josh Martin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where is the committee, itself, established? It may make most sense to keep the provisions about populating the committee in the same place as those that create it.

The above assumes we're discussing a particular committee. If it's a general rule on populating committees, then special rule makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2022 at 12:14 PM, Atul Kapur said:

Where is the committee, itself, established?

I'm referring to an Ad Hoc committee established by a motion of the board.

On 2/21/2022 at 12:11 PM, Josh Martin said:

It should also be noted that the sort of rule you describe could not be suspended, unless the rule provides for its own suspension.

You're referring of course if the rule was established in a bylaw?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2022 at 1:22 PM, Tomm said:

I'm referring to an Ad Hoc committee established by a motion of the board.

Thank you. Rules pertaining to the selection of the members of a special committee are generally included in the motion to create the committee. If for some reason this is not done or it is desired to change the composition of the committee, the motion may later be amended.

It certainly would not be necessary or desirable to adopt rules pertaining to the appointment of a particular special committee in the bylaws (or even in a special rule of order), although if it was desired to adopt rules pertaining to all committees (or at least all special committees), that would be a different matter.

On 2/21/2022 at 1:22 PM, Tomm said:

You're referring of course if the rule was established in a bylaw?

No, it can't be suspended regardless of where the rule is established (unless the rule so provides). The rule in question has application outside of a meeting of the assembly, and therefore cannot be suspended. The rule could, however, be amended.

(I am assuming that the portion of the rule which refers to the "board chair" in fact refers to the occupant of that office and not just whoever happens to be chairing the board at the present time. In the latter case, the rule could be suspended.)

Edited by Josh Martin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2022 at 2:22 PM, Tomm said:

I'm referring to an Ad Hoc committee established by a motion of the board.

The motion should state how the committee is to be populated, or actually name the members. See RONR (12th ed.) 13:8(c). As that sub-paragraph also states, there could be a general rule about populating ad  hoc committees in the bylaws or rules of the assembly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2022 at 12:49 PM, Atul Kapur said:

The motion should state how the committee is to be populated, or actually name the members.

Well, the members of the board aren't that savvy in the use of RONR. After much pressure from the general membership they finally decided to form an Ad Hoc committee to review and revise the Bylaws. I believe this should be a standing committee but I'll take what I can get for now. As a non-member of the board, I'm applying for a position on that committee in hopes of improving many issues. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...