Special Rules of Order

[Guest rodavidson]

The bylaws say the following with no mention of special rules of order: 

“The rules contained in the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the Society in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with these bylaws.”

Can the association adopt special rules of order that conflict with and supercede RONR? Or are they limited to only adopting special rules of order that are not in conflict with RONR?

[Joshua Katz]

Yes, although the association should amend its adoption of RONR to match the language provided in same.

The bylaws call for following RONR when applicable and not inconsistent with the bylaws, and say nothing about special rules of order. RONR, in turn, says that an organization may adopt special rules of order, and that such rules supersede RONR. Since the bylaws contain no inconsistent language, you follow RONR in this regard.

[Shmuel Gerber]

On 2/13/2024 at 1:22 AM, Joshua Katz said:

Yes, although the association should amend its adoption of RONR to match the language provided in same.

The bylaws call for following RONR when applicable and not inconsistent with the bylaws, and say nothing about special rules of order. RONR, in turn, says that an organization may adopt special rules of order, and that such rules supersede RONR. Since the bylaws contain no inconsistent language, you follow RONR in this regard.

I don't think the answer is so clear-cut as that. Suppose the bylaws said that the order of business shall be as prescribed in Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised.

Would you say that the society could still adopt a special order of business to govern all its meetings because RONR says that it can? 

[Joshua Katz]

On 2/13/2024 at 12:02 PM, Shmuel Gerber said:

I don't think the answer is so clear-cut as that. Suppose the bylaws said that the order of business shall be as prescribed in Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised.

Would you say that the society could still adopt a special order of business to govern all its meetings because RONR says that it can? 

 

On 2/13/2024 at 1:22 AM, Joshua Katz said:

The bylaws call for following RONR when applicable and not inconsistent with the bylaws, and say nothing about special rules of order. RONR, in turn, says that an organization may adopt special rules of order, and that such rules supersede RONR. Since the bylaws contain no inconsistent language, you follow RONR in this regard.

I think the bolded portions above deal with this objection. If the bylaws say "the order of bsiness shall be as prescribed in RONR," they are not otherwise silent on the question of the order of business.

Put another way, your question is akin to asking if a special rule of order may override a bylaw, when the bylaw incorporates RONR by reference. I don't think the latter matters. But in the case presented by the OP, there was no bylaw to override.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 2/13/2024 at 12:02 PM, Shmuel Gerber said:

I don't think the answer is so clear-cut as that. Suppose the bylaws said that the order of business shall be as prescribed in Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised.

Would you say that the society could still adopt a special order of business to govern all its meetings because RONR says that it can? 

Perhaps, in this specific case, but the original statement is simply the general phrasing on adoption of a parliamentary authority, but omitting the reference to Special Rules of Order.

In this case, since RONR itself says that it yields to both bylaws and special rules of order, I think the omission does not create an obstacle to creating special rules of order.  But I agree that it would be wise to amend the statement to use the recommended language.