[Lpk-execomm] Amendment of agenda at last meeting violates bylaws
Ken Moellman
ken.moellman at lpky.org
Wed Feb 6 02:36:43 EST 2019
So just to be crystal clear... Bylaws 900 and 1100 are 100% completely
able to be overridden by a majority vote of the convention body? If
not, which sections can or cannot be overridden by a majority vote of
the convention body?
---
Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
LPKY State Party Treasurer
On 2019-02-05 14:07, Ken Moellman via Lpk-execomm wrote:
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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