[Lpk-execomm] Amendment of agenda at last meeting violates bylaws

[Harlen R. Compton]

I think I may be missing what you're getting at.  Bylaw 900.5.8 sets the 
default agenda to that which was provided in notice (the pre-amended 
agenda).  900.5.X is about the CONVENTION BODY not the State Executive 
Committee.  The convention body may adopt the agenda submitted by the 
Chair, or may amend it, in any case it is amended/adopted by a simple 
majority.  The "2/3" you were speaking of is to amend the agenda after 
it has been adopted by the delegates in convention.

I concur that 900.5.8 requires that this "default agenda" be the one 
that was provided in the notice to the delegates and that we have to 
start from there.  However, a majority of the state executive committee 
voted to shift the agenda around and I suspect that it is harmless error 
to have the revised agenda on the website because one of the first 
things that is going to happen at convention is to amend the agenda to 
be what we voted on last week.  I think it may be more informative that 
posting the original agenda knowing how likely things are to be amended. 
  We could change it back, but to what end?  The agenda on the website 
isn't binding at all and is meant to assist delegates in making plans.

As to the language of 900.5.X (and also 1100) being "unconstitutional", 
I disagree.  Yes, the convention "shall" be governed by RONR.  It is 
RONR that provides guidance on the interpretation of governing documents 
and the use of affirmative language (i.e. "shall") with regard to 
committees and that guidance from RONR is what created the impetus to 
section 1100 to reign some of the Rules Committee's responsibilities in. 
  RONR governs the convention, and RONR itself gives deference to the 
party's governing documents.  To say that something is unconstitutional 
because it supersedes RONR in convention would also be to say that the 
rest of the Constitution and Bylaws that cover anything that *could* be 
acted on in convention are illegal except for Article VII Section 5 of 
the Constitution.




On 2019-02-04 01:54, Ken Moellman via Lpk-execomm wrote:
> I'd like to get a ruling from the chair on this...
> 
> 
> Does section 900.5.x violate the Constitution, or did the motion to
> re-arrange the convention agenda violate bylaw 900.5.8?  Because from
> what I can see, it's one or the other.
> 
> Also, if 900.5.x violates the Constitution, I think that means section
> 1100 violates it as well, since they both affect the conduct of a
> convention, and the Constitution says it's run by RONR except where
> outlined.
> 
> It does a disservice to members if we have the wrong (illegal) agenda
> posted to the website. So this needs a ruling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For reference, here is the constitution, saying that RONR runs
> conventions except the order amendments as outlined in the
> Constitution:
> 
> 
> 
> ARTICLE VII: CONVENTIONS
> 
> Section 5. Conduct of Convention
> 
> A. Robert’s Rules of Order, shall govern the conduct of all
> conventions, except as set forth in this section;
> 
> B. The first order of business shall be the credentialing of all
> Voting Members to the Convention, which shall be determined in
> accordance with the rules established for the convention (which may
> include, by way of example, use of the Membership Committee or a
> Credentials Committee), and the Elections Committee, insofar as voting
> for nominations for candidates to public office are concerned;
> 
> C. The second order of business shall be the election of a Convention
> Chair and Secretary; the Secretary shall keep minutes reflecting
> actions taken at the convention. The Chair shall be the Executive
> Committee Chair unless not present, or removed by a three-fifths (3/5)
> vote of the convention body. The Secretary of the Executive Committee
> shall be the Secretary of the Convention, unless not present, or
> removed by a three-fifths (3/5) vote of the convention body, The Chair
> shall be entitled to employ or utilize a parliamentarian to assist on
> matters of procedure.
> 
> D. The Party, in Convention, shall have the ability to waive, by
> three-fifths (3/5) vote, any and all formalities, notice requirements,
> and legalities related to any question arising under this
> Constitution, except for questions arising under rules enacted by the
> Elections Committee for nominations for candidates to public office,
> which questions are reserved to the Elections Committee, and is
> encouraged to do so provided such requirements are determined by the
> Party, in Convention, to be substantially complied with.
> 
> E. Any nomination of candidates shall be as set forth in Article VIII,
> below, and shall be complied with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
> LPKY State Party Treasurer
> 
> On 2019-01-31 16:12, Ken Moellman via Lpk-execomm wrote:
>> Actually, it looks like 900.5 may contain unconstitutional language:
>> 
>> 
>> ARTICLE VII: CONVENTIONS
>> 
>> Section 5. Conduct of Convention
>> 
>> Robert’s Rules of Order, shall govern the conduct of all conventions,
>> except as set forth in this section;
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The use of the word "shall" means it is not an option.  So if anything
>> trumps RONR in Bylaws that doesn't conform to the specific exemptions
>> in the Constitution then it's invalid.
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
>> LPKY State Party Treasurer
>> 
>> On 2019-01-31 15:05, Ken Moellman via Lpk-execomm wrote:
>>> FYI - here's that language I was concerned about when we discussed
>>> amending the agenda:  "The agenda shall be the agenda that was 
>>> provided
>>> in the notice for the Convention".  We had a vote, but the vote did 
>>> not
>>> have the vote threshold of 3/5ths under Bylaw 1200 to waive Bylaw
>>> 900.5.8.
>>> 
>>> 900.5.8        The fourth order of business by the Chair shall be
>>> presentation of the agenda for additional business.  THE AGENDA SHALL 
>>> BE
>>> THE AGENDA THAT WAS PROVIDED IN THE NOTICE for the Convention that 
>>> was
>>> given by the Chair of the Executive Committee of the State Party.  
>>> The
>>> convention body may debate, adopt or amend such agenda, by a simple
>>> majority vote.  Once adopted, the agenda may not be modified, or its
>>> order of business deviated from, except by a motion to suspend the
>>> orders of the day, WHICH MUST PASS BY A 2/3 VOTE.
>>> 
>>> And there's also a codified 2/3rds threshold.  What if the body wants 
>>> to
>>> make a motion to suspend only be 60%, or 55%, or even 50%?  We can't
>>> suspend the bylaws, so we can't lower that particular codified 
>>> threshold
>>> even though the body can otherwise adjust any other threshold to
>>> suspend.  This is creating a restriction on the body outside 
>>> convention.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Again, I suggest that we should gut bylaw 900.  At a minimum, the 
>>> 2/3rds
>>> threshold should be removed, and barring other action, the original
>>> agenda restored.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
>>> LPKY State Party Treasurer
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lpk-execomm mailing list
>>> Lpk-execomm at lists.lpky.org
>>> http://lpmail.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpk-execomm
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lpk-execomm mailing list
>> Lpk-execomm at lists.lpky.org
>> http://lpmail.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpk-execomm
> _______________________________________________
> Lpk-execomm mailing list
> Lpk-execomm at lists.lpky.org
> http://lpmail.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpk-execomm