Can the amendment be made?

Parliamentary Procedure Q&A

Q: My organization has a bylaw stating that the amendments to be voted upon must be reported for discussion at the two consecutive general meetings next preceding the meeting at which a vote is taken, as the first order of business. At meeting No. 1 a certain slate of proposed isolated amendments was presented, but not as the first order of business with the report dated Revised 8/98. At meeting No. 2 a different report dated May, 1998 was presented, as the first order of business. There are material differences in the disputed provisions between the two versions. At meeting No. 2, the committee orally stated that their intention was to present an amendment which was different than that contained in both the August and the May reports, and orally described the effect of the proposed amendment. They propose to place the matter of the orally described amendment for a vote at meeting No. 3. The matter concerns an amendment of a term limits provision for an officer, which would bar the officer from running for an additional term unless amended, and the nominations for the next election are to be held at meeting No. 3.

My question is: If the bylaws state that the amendments to be voted on are to be presented at the two meetings next preceding the meeting at which a vote is to be taken, is it valid to present at meeting No. 3 a proposal which appeared on neither report and was orally described at meeting No. 2 but not meeting No. 1, and, if the matter is voted on over objection that it violates the bylaws, is the vote effective to amend? - Christina Lee, Oct. 16, 1998

A: If I understand the situation, then it is not in order to present the proposed amendment at meeting No. 3. If the amendment is proposed, you may rise to a Point of Order (RONR Section 23). If the chair rules that the point is not well taken, you may Appeal From The Decision Of The Chair (RONR Section 24). This places the question before the assembly as to whether the rules of the organization allow the amendment to be moved. The chair should state the question as "Shall the decision of the chair be sustained?" A majority vote in the negative overrules the chair.

HOME QUESTIONS OTHER SITES