[Lpk-execomm] Amendment of agenda at last meeting violates bylaws
Ken Moellman
ken.moellman at lpky.org
Tue Feb 5 14:07:26 EST 2019
I agree that it will take up time at convention if they're left in
place.
Or, we could just repeal them all now, if they aren't binding anyway.
---
Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
LPKY State Party Treasurer
On 2019-02-05 13:57, chris at cwiestlaw.com wrote:
> This is non-sensical and makes no sense to me.
>
> There are default rules in 900. They are what gets presented to the
> delegates for adoption or amendment. Section 900 also says the
> delegates can alter the rules. The delegates also get to alter, if
> they want, the threshold for suspending the rules. In the absence of
> the delegates tweaking it, it’s a 2/3 vote.
>
> There is nothing in 900 that limits, or in any way restricts, the
> delegates on the convention floor.
>
> That is why the section says:
> "900.5.7 The third order of business by the Chair shall be the
> presentation of these Rules by the Rules Committee, as approved by the
> State Party Executive Committee, to the convention body, which may
> debate, adopt or amend these rules, by a simple majority vote. Once
> approved, these rules may not be further amended, but may be suspended
> by a two-thirds (2/3) vote."
>
> The rules may be suspended by 2/3, but again, even the 2/3 is a
> default rules that can be tweaked.
>
> There is also a default agenda. It is what gets presented for
> adoption or amendment. The executive committee has seen fit to
> present another recommendation to the delegates for their
> consideration.
>
> "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."
>
> If the delegates wanted, they could also tweak the 2/3 vote threshold
> to suspect the agenda.
>
> We have now -- again -- spent more time and energy than is necessary
> focusing on stuff that the delegates will take up on the floor to do
> whatever the majority of the delegates want to do in terms of the
> agenda and convention rules -- and will probably have resolved in a
> matter of about 5 minutes on the convention floor.
>
> I have a real fear that we will end up spending an hour of convention
> time dealing with this sort of minutiae instead of getting to the
> actual convention business. I would suggest that is no one's
> interest.
>
> -CW
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lpk-execomm <lpk-execomm-bounces at lists.lpky.org> On Behalf Of
> Ken Moellman via Lpk-execomm
> Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2019 1:39 PM
> To: Harlen R. Compton <harlen.compton at lpky.org>
> Cc: Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org>; lpk-execomm at lists.lpky.org
> Subject: Re: [Lpk-execomm] Amendment of agenda at last meeting violates
> bylaws
>
>
> Okay. Let me try to walk through this logic.
>
>
>
> Article VII: RONR has procedures and rules set out for conventions.
> They can be altered, yes; but by default, there is a body of rules
> there. We all agree on this, I believe.
>
> The Constitution says that "Robert’s Rules of Order, shall govern the
> conduct of all conventions, except as set forth in this section"...
> So
> the wording makes clear that default RONR now dictates how the
> convention is run, except where specifically outlined in the article.
>
> It then lists the first order of business, the second order of
> business, that _formalities_ may be waived by the convention body, and
> that election rules are to be done elsewhere.
>
> There is no authority for the Executive Committee to alter anything
> else. Anything abridging or altering RONR outside of the specific
> exceptions is not Constitutional.
>
> By default, RONR gives the convention body the right to alter
> thresholds, such as the threshold for a motion to suspend the rules or
> to amend an agenda. But the bylaws prevent this, codifying a hard
> 2/3rds threshold. The 2/3rds does indeed address amending the agenda
> after it's been passed. But what if the convention body wants motions
> to suspend the rules to be lower than 2/3rds? Normally, that's their
> right under RONR. The bylaws have taken away the convention body's
> ability to decide that threshold, and done so outside convention
> without consent of the convention body.
>
> The bylaws amend the rules set under RONR by taking away the ability
> to amend this threshold, and therefore violate Article VII.
>
>
>
>
> Additionally, Bylaw 900.5.8 specifically says that the agenda to be
> presented voted upon by the delegates is the agenda provided in the
> notice. However, we are now advertising a different agenda as the
> proposed agenda. This does a disservice to the delegates. It is NOT
> what they are to vote on, per the Bylaws. We're just advertising some
> other agenda that, yes, a majority of Execomm voted for, but the
> majority of Execomm has no authority to even make the proposed agenda
> or
> to have presented to convention delegates.
>
>
>
>
> Here's my proposal -- since the Rules Committee didn't get their report
> in on time, and since the Execomm wants to amend the agenda, and
> because
> the bylaws alter the rights of delegates in convention, and because the
> bylaws were supposed to be "temporary"... Let's repeal bylaws sections
> 900 and 1100. We have RONR to fall back on, it's what we did up until
> 2017, and there's no good reason to give delegates had full control of
> _their_ convention. We follow the Constitution, and we roll with it.
> It will avoid a mess at the beginning of the convention, as I make
> motions to alter agendas to wipe out those restrictions.
>
>
>
> ---
> Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
> LPKY State Party Treasurer
>
> On 2019-02-04 11:47, Harlen R. Compton wrote:
>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Lpk-execomm mailing list
> Lpk-execomm at lists.lpky.org
> http://lpmail.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpk-execomm
More information about the Lpk-execomm
mailing list