Adoption of special rule

[rockbust]

Hi. At a previous annual membership meeting a motion was adopted to restrict voice vote (aye or no. ). Voting is now restricted to raising the hand and an actual count to be taken. There was no previous notice of this rule being adopted and our annual meeting at most will see about 25 percent of the membership. 

In the past voice vote was a pretty quick way to vote. If there was any question the chair would use additional methods to verify the vote. 

My question is would this be considered a special rule and as such would it have required previous notice and a 2/3 vote or a majority of the entire membership for adoption? 

Also if that is the case what can be a done about it at this time? Can the board state that that rule was out of order? Do we have to wait to next year's annual meeting to raise a point of order? Or is it simply too late?

We maintain a standing rule / policy document and do we update this reflecting that it is now a special rule?

Our bylaws uses Roberts rules and we have no special provisions for voting. 

Thank you 

Robert

[Josh Martin]

On 5/6/2024 at 10:35 AM, rockbust said:

At a previous annual membership meeting a motion was adopted to restrict voice vote (aye or no. ). Voting is now restricted to raising the hand and an actual count to be taken. There was no previous notice of this rule being adopted and our annual meeting at most will see about 25 percent of the membership. 

To be clear, my understanding is that the rule in question provides that a counted show of hands vote shall be taken for all votes, unless otherwise ordered by the assembly. Is that an accurate summary?

Also, is the rule in question applicable only to meetings of the membership?

On 5/6/2024 at 10:35 AM, rockbust said:

My question is would this be considered a special rule and as such would it have required previous notice and a 2/3 vote or a majority of the entire membership for adoption? 

If the rule in question is to apply to all meetings (which I understand to be the intent), yes, a rule of this nature is a special rule of order, and therefore requires a 2/3 vote with previous notice or a vote of a majority of the entire membership for adoption.

In the alternative, a rule of this nature may be adopted for just the current meeting by a 2/3 vote, without notice.

On 5/6/2024 at 10:35 AM, rockbust said:

Also if that is the case what can be a done about it at this time?

A Point of Order may be raised regarding this matter that the rule is null and void on the grounds that 1) previous notice was not given and 2) a majority of the entire membership was not present. As a consequence, adoption of this rule violated rules protecting absentees, and therefore there is a continuing breach. In my view, the Point of Order should be ruled well taken.

On 5/6/2024 at 10:35 AM, rockbust said:

Can the board state that that rule was out of order?

No. The board lacks the authority to rule out of order an action taken by a superior body (the general membership).

On 5/6/2024 at 10:35 AM, rockbust said:

Do we have to wait to next year's annual meeting to raise a point of order?

You would need to wait until the next meeting of the membership. If the membership only meets annually, then yes, that would mean waiting until next year's annual meeting.

On 5/6/2024 at 10:35 AM, rockbust said:

Or is it simply too late?

It is not too late. A violation of rules protecting absentees is a continuing breach.

On 5/6/2024 at 10:35 AM, rockbust said:

We maintain a standing rule / policy document and do we update this reflecting that it is now a special rule?

Yes, I suppose you would. Unless and until this rule is declared to be null and void, it is a special rule of order of the organization and should be properly recorded.

Edited May 6, 2024 at 03:52 PM by Josh Martin

[rockbust]

Thank you for the detailed reply. Yes all your are correct that this was passed as a permanent rule.