Post by MTD on Mar 18, 2004 16:17:40 GMT -6
I threatened (see campechesteel.proboards15.com/index.cgi?board=Division&action=display&thread=1079586617) Bylaw change proposals. Here is the 12th.
"Proposition 12": Provide for Robert's Rules to apply.
Overview:
Neither the Bylaws themselves nor any higher rules binding on the Division specify what rules of order apply to meetings involving the Division (particularly meetings of the members and meetings of the Executive Committee). There is no record of meetings of either the members or the Executive Committee having voluntarily adopted any particular body of rules of order. In principle, this allows for a disagreement within the body about whether business has been transacted in a lawful fashion, and whether a given decision or its opposite is the actual legal decision. In the absence of very large support on one side or the other, the issue could remain impossible to resolve without the intervention of a court of law, and the court of law would end up ruling as best it could apply common law grounded in the tradition of English parliamentary procedure but without any statute law available!
Lest those with an aversion to standard parliamentary procedure be worried that a one size fits all solution would unfairly compromise the ability of an assembly to deal with a special situation outside the intended realm of parliamentary procedure, it should be noted that Robert's Rules specifically provide for an assembly to be able to adopt its own individual rules of order, and even to suspend any rules of order which prevent it from doing something in a fashion to its liking. Robert's Rules would simply provide the framework here which specifies exactly how difficult it is (two-thirds vote) to suspend rules of order.
Robert's Rules do not override the bylaws or properly adopted rules of order of an assembly. They do provide default answers to a lot of questions which otherwise would have, and even now are being noticed to have, no answers.
Note also that a broad reading of the proposed change might result in the bout committee at a tournament being required to follow Robert's Rules even where the USFA specifies certain powers to reside solely in the chairman of that bout committee. This is in fact an overly broad reading. In addition to Robert's Rules themselves stating that they are subordinate to an organization's own specific rules, the actual proposed text makes explicit mention of inapplicability in cases of conflict, and explicitly includes the possibility of conflict with the USFA. So, nothing in the proposed change can possibly trump what the Operations Manual says about the conduct of a bout committee.
Current text:
None. The last article of the Bylaws is Article XI, concerning amending the Bylaws.
Motion:
In the Gulf Coast Division Bylaws, renumber Article XI to Article XII, and insert "Article XI -- Parliamentary Authority", reading: "The rules contained in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern THE DIVISION in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with rules and policies of USFA, INC, these Bylaws, and any special rules of order THE DIVISION may adopt. This shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, meetings of the Executive Committee, meetings of other committees, and meetings of the members."
"Proposition 12": Provide for Robert's Rules to apply.
Overview:
Neither the Bylaws themselves nor any higher rules binding on the Division specify what rules of order apply to meetings involving the Division (particularly meetings of the members and meetings of the Executive Committee). There is no record of meetings of either the members or the Executive Committee having voluntarily adopted any particular body of rules of order. In principle, this allows for a disagreement within the body about whether business has been transacted in a lawful fashion, and whether a given decision or its opposite is the actual legal decision. In the absence of very large support on one side or the other, the issue could remain impossible to resolve without the intervention of a court of law, and the court of law would end up ruling as best it could apply common law grounded in the tradition of English parliamentary procedure but without any statute law available!
Lest those with an aversion to standard parliamentary procedure be worried that a one size fits all solution would unfairly compromise the ability of an assembly to deal with a special situation outside the intended realm of parliamentary procedure, it should be noted that Robert's Rules specifically provide for an assembly to be able to adopt its own individual rules of order, and even to suspend any rules of order which prevent it from doing something in a fashion to its liking. Robert's Rules would simply provide the framework here which specifies exactly how difficult it is (two-thirds vote) to suspend rules of order.
Robert's Rules do not override the bylaws or properly adopted rules of order of an assembly. They do provide default answers to a lot of questions which otherwise would have, and even now are being noticed to have, no answers.
Note also that a broad reading of the proposed change might result in the bout committee at a tournament being required to follow Robert's Rules even where the USFA specifies certain powers to reside solely in the chairman of that bout committee. This is in fact an overly broad reading. In addition to Robert's Rules themselves stating that they are subordinate to an organization's own specific rules, the actual proposed text makes explicit mention of inapplicability in cases of conflict, and explicitly includes the possibility of conflict with the USFA. So, nothing in the proposed change can possibly trump what the Operations Manual says about the conduct of a bout committee.
Current text:
None. The last article of the Bylaws is Article XI, concerning amending the Bylaws.
Motion:
In the Gulf Coast Division Bylaws, renumber Article XI to Article XII, and insert "Article XI -- Parliamentary Authority", reading: "The rules contained in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern THE DIVISION in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with rules and policies of USFA, INC, these Bylaws, and any special rules of order THE DIVISION may adopt. This shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, meetings of the Executive Committee, meetings of other committees, and meetings of the members."