By-laws vs Rules of Order

[Guest Veronica]

I am in dire need of some information relating to robert rules of order versus the organization's by laws. There are several issues that I need cleared up:

* Our by laws clearly states that the only people who can change the by-laws are the founders. The general assymbly can request an amendment to the by-laws and it can be voted on during the assembly and then it has to be presented to the Founders /Directors to vote on. One of the officers stated that the vote that was carried out in the meeting is binding because it was voted in the meeting and according to Roberts rule of orders it stands even though the by-laws states differently. (The motion that was on the table was about making a fine for late payments of dues. At the same meeting the President clearly stated that we could not amend the by-laws because at the time out 501©3 was sent to the IRS for approval and it would cause some problems) Can any one tell me what does the Robert Rule of order states, which leads me to my next concern.

* The next concern it one of the members received a letter stating they were inactive due to dues weren't paid on time which resulted into fines being assessed for late payments. In the by-laws there are no late payment fines in the section that discusses fines. It just states each member is responsible for paying there dues. Our bylaws also does not discuss about how you will become an inactive member. The sergeant of the arms placed the member on inactive membership due to not paying the fines which is being questioned and she quoted in the email that the inactive was because of a particular section that has to do with voting. It stated if there is an inactive member they can not vote. My question is does the Roberts rules of Order takes precedent of the by-laws?

I know this sounds like a lot but, this organization was put together and not though out thoroughly but, I just want the members to be treated fairly.Email me

[Kim Goldsworthy]

One of the officers stated that the vote that was carried out in the meeting is binding because it was voted in the meeting and according to Roberts rule of orders it stands even though the by-laws states differently.

The motion that was on the table was about making a fine for late payments of dues.

You cannot impose fine via a motion, without bylaws' authorization.

You can only impose fines if your bylaws allow for fines.

At the same meeting the President clearly stated that we could not amend the by-laws because at the time out 501©3 was sent to the IRS for approval and it would cause some problems. Can any one tell me what does the Robert Rule of order states, which leads me to my next concern.

You won't find any reference to I.R.S. tax code in The Book.

There is no relationship between (a.) amending one's bylaws; vs. (b.) what I.R.S. tax code says.

* The next concern it one of the members received a letter stating they were inactive due to dues weren't paid on time which resulted into fines being assessed for late payments.

As I said, no fines can be imposed, unless the bylaws provide for fines.

In the by-laws there are no late payment fines in the section that discusses fines. It just states each member is responsible for paying there dues.

Then it is settled.

Our bylaws also does not discuss about how you will become an inactive member.

Then there is no such category or no such status.

The sergeant of the arms placed the member on inactive membership due to not paying the fines which is being questioned and she quoted in the email that the inactive was because of a particular section that has to do with voting. It stated if there is an inactive member they can not vote. My question is does the Roberts rules of Order takes precedent of the by-laws?

No. - RONR does not take precedence over bylaws. Bylaws are superior.

[Tim Wynn]

* Our by laws clearly states that the only people who can change the by-laws are the founders.

That says it all right there. See RONR(10th ed.), p.562, l. 9-10.

[Tim Wynn]

The general assymbly can request an amendment to the by-laws and it can be voted on during the assembly and then it has to be presented to the Founders /Directors to vote on.

This is only a REQUEST. Requests, by nature, can be refused.

[Tim Wynn]

One of the officers stated that the vote that was carried out in the meeting is binding because it was voted in the meeting and according to Roberts rule of orders it stands even though the by-laws states differently.

This is not true. See RONR(10th ed.) p.332 l. 15-18.

[Tim Wynn]

(The motion that was on the table was about making a fine for late payments of dues.

Fines can only be assessed if they are if authorized in the bylaws. See RONR(10th ed.), p. 624, l. 20 through p. 625, l. 1.

[Tim Wynn]

At the same meeting the President clearly stated that we could not amend the by-laws because at the time out 501©3 was sent to the IRS for approval and it would cause some problems)

This is not a factor as far as parliamentary procedure is concerned.

[Tim Wynn]

* The next concern it one of the members received a letter stating they were inactive due to dues weren't paid on time which resulted into fines being assessed for late payments.

Members do not automatically lose their membership rights due to being late on dues. See RONR (10th ed.), p. 393, l. 26 through p. 394, l. 4.

[Tim Wynn]

In the by-laws there are no late payment fines in the section that discusses fines. It just states each member is responsible for paying there dues.

The membership is responsible for interpreting its bylaws. For principles of interpretation, see RONR(10th ed.), p. 570 - 573.

[Tim Wynn]

Our bylaws also does not discuss about how you will become an inactive member. The sergeant of the arms placed the member on inactive membership due to not paying the fines...

RONR doesn’t give the sergeant at arms such power. It has to come from somewhere, or it doesn’t exist. It’s that simple. Ask him to tell you where it says he can do this.

... which is being questioned and she quoted in the email that the inactive was because of a particular section that has to do with voting. It stated if there is an inactive member they can not vote.

The bylaws should define “inactive member,” including how a member becomes inactive. If it does not, the sergeant at arms wouldn’t be have the authority to decide who is inactive, unless the bylaws specifically dictate that.

[Tim Wynn]

My question is does the Roberts rules of Order takes precedent of the by-laws?

No, it’s the other way around. Robert’s Rules yields when in conflict with the bylaws. Except for the corporate charter in an incorporated society, the bylaws comprise the highest body of rules and supersede all other rules of the society. See RONR(10th ed.), p. 14, l. 12-20

I know this sounds like a lot but, this organization was put together and not though out thoroughly but, I just want the members to be treated fairly.

The best thing to do in situations like this is to amend the bylaws to better suit the membership. Unfortunately, with your organization, the bylaws say they can only be amended by the founders. So, the only action open to the non-founding membership is to make a request, which it should probably do. Outside of that, just try to make it clear to the founders that you want the bylaws changed, and the more members you can get together, the better your chances of getting them to take note.

I would also consider requesting that they change the stipulation for bylaw amendment, giving that right to the membership.

You might want to let them know that you won’t be renewing your memberships if there is no change.

[hmtcastle]

Our by laws clearly states that the only people who can change the by-laws are the founders.

Then you'd better amend them before the founders die (or move out of town).