Newbie -- There are a couple options that I can think of to help the situation where the by-laws are being used as a weapon against another board member. First, is there a "ethics" clause in the by-laws that outlines appropriate board member behavior, it could be the basis for a censure against that member. If there isn't such a clause, it sounds like there needs to be, so a motion to amend the by-laws to add such language would be the next step.
Also, the portion of the by-laws that are being used as weapons should be examined against parliamentary authority to determine if the verbage is valid. If the verbage is substantially different than that recommended, a motion to amend the by-laws to correct the language would be in order. Keep in mind, however, that an organization's by-laws can be different than recommended by parliamentary authority, it's just not the ideal.
If the aggressor's complaints are never brought to a motion and/or the motion is abandoned due to lack of a second, this can be corrected as well. First, unless the topic is on the agenda, the aggressor does not have permission to bring it up. Secondly, if the aggressor's complaints is on the agenda (which the chair can deny), the chair needs to "ask the question" (force the aggressor to make a motion instead of allowing a verbal barrage). If the motion is never made or if it doesn't get a second, it's time to move on to the next agenda item.
Also, your by-laws need to include text prohibiting substantially identical motions from being raised meeting after meeting.
We're in a similar situation, but the bylaws are now being used by one person as a weapon against another to remove her from her position. It's been raised at meetings this year that they were never voted on. How do we help the situation? According to the bylaws, we're not even members of the Corporation.
Parent, for those reasons, wait another month or two until the end of the year, and make the recommendation that a subcommittee be formed to review and revise the bylaws and bring them back in the fall. Tell them you're willing to head it - that might work!
Sometimes, it's easier to just go along with the flow until the main offender is gone, especially if that person is the group leader, and then enact changes after he or she is out of the way.
Well, the main "offender" in this situation is the president. We have discussed reviewing and updating the bylaws as officers, but it's only talk. Nothing is ever followed up on. The general membership is pretty lathargic and attendance at our monthly meetings is very low. Those that do chair committees tend to just want to do their own thing and it seems that the current prez is okay with that. Our principal doesn't want to step on any toes and tends to go in the direction of peacemaker. I don't fault him for that, but it does tend to legitmize the actions of everyone else.
But I will take your suggestions and bring it up the next time we meet. We'll see what happens.
