Watson Posted January 12, 2013 at 07:43 PM Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 at 07:43 PM Here is another, 'That's the way we've always done it!' situation. Back in the day, our assembly decided that they should utilize a Consent Agenda (but never bothered to pass a Special Rule of Order to that effect).The current presiding officer and many of his colleagues insist that a motion (seconded; majority vote) is necessary to remove an item of business from the Consent Agenda for discussion, etc., during the regular order of business. "Don't quote RONR to me; those are just guidelines and it doesn't say that you don't have to make a motion!"Unfortunately, business that should be debated, and might possibly NOT be approved by majority vote, is thereby left on the Consent Agenda to be approved en bloc along with everything else.If I raise a Point of Order, what evidence/explanation/quotation can I present to the Chair so that he will rule my Point 'Well Taken'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted January 12, 2013 at 07:58 PM Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 at 07:58 PM The current presiding officer [sez]. "Don't quote RONR to me; those are just guidelines ... !".....[W]hat evidence/explanation/quotation can I present to the Chair so that he will rule my Point 'Well Taken'?I'd say a foot-tall stack of unmarked bills, small denominations (tens and twenties), is your best bet. But stay tuned for some other, more parliamentary insights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 12, 2013 at 08:15 PM Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 at 08:15 PM Here is another, 'That's the way we've always done it!' situation. Back in the day, our assembly decided that they should utilize a Consent Agenda (but never bothered to pass a Special Rule of Order to that effect).The current presiding officer and many of his colleagues insist that a motion (seconded; majority vote) is necessary to remove an item of business from the Consent Agenda for discussion, etc., during the regular order of business. "Don't quote RONR to me; those are just guidelines and it doesn't say that you don't have to make a motion!"Unfortunately, business that should be debated, and might possibly NOT be approved by majority vote, is thereby left on the Consent Agenda to be approved en bloc along with everything else.If I raise a Point of Order, what evidence/explanation/quotation can I present to the Chair so that he will rule my Point 'Well Taken'?Where do you get this idea, without a special rule of order saying so? See RONR, 11th ed., page 361, lines 11-32. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 13, 2013 at 05:49 PM Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 at 05:49 PM Here is another, 'That's the way we've always done it!' situation. Back in the day, our assembly decided that they should utilize a Consent Agenda (but never bothered to pass a Special Rule of Order to that effect).The current presiding officer and many of his colleagues insist that a motion (seconded; majority vote) is necessary to remove an item of business from the Consent Agenda for discussion, etc., during the regular order of business. "Don't quote RONR to me; those are just guidelines and it doesn't say that you don't have to make a motion!"Unfortunately, business that should be debated, and might possibly NOT be approved by majority vote, is thereby left on the Consent Agenda to be approved en bloc along with everything else.If I raise a Point of Order, what evidence/explanation/quotation can I present to the Chair so that he will rule my Point 'Well Taken'?See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 274-275, "MOTIONS THAT MUST BE DIVIDED ON DEMAND." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watson Posted January 15, 2013 at 06:06 PM Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2013 at 06:06 PM Many thanks to David, Dan and Josh. Dan, would you please expand on the statement in RONR: "This calendar is called over periodically at a point established in the agnda by special rule of order, at least preceding standing committee reports." (This was the source of my reference to a special rule of order; so is such a rule needed or not?)Our assembly does have a fixed Order of Business which includes a Consent Calendar. No other document otherwise mentions a consent calendar or any limitations therein on debate or amendment.As always; I appreciate the enlightenment! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 15, 2013 at 06:21 PM Report Share Posted January 15, 2013 at 06:21 PM Many thanks to David, Dan and Josh. Dan, would you please expand on the statement in RONR: "This calendar is called over periodically at a point established in the agnda by special rule of order, at least preceding standing committee reports." (This was the source of my reference to a special rule of order; so is such a rule needed or not?)Our assembly does have a fixed Order of Business which includes a Consent Calendar. No other document otherwise mentions a consent calendar or any limitations therein on debate or amendment.As always; I appreciate the enlightenment!If, as you say, your assembly has a fixed order of business which includes a consent calendar, it obviously has a special rule of order indicating the point at which it is to be taken up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 15, 2013 at 11:44 PM Report Share Posted January 15, 2013 at 11:44 PM Our assembly does have a fixed Order of Business which includes a Consent Calendar. No other document otherwise mentions a consent calendar or any limitations therein on debate or amendment.Then it would seem you have a consent calendar, but the items on it "are considered under the rules just as any other business." See RONR, 11th ed., pg. 361, lines 24-32. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kuzmin Posted October 24, 2014 at 04:41 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2014 at 04:41 PM Does any know if a Planning and Land use motion can be considered on a consent calendar? Can any member of the public object to a consent item? If a member of the public submits a speaker card on an agenda item - can the item be pooled into a consent agenda without hearing the public comment? Any definitive answers will be appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted October 24, 2014 at 05:49 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2014 at 05:49 PM Does any know . . . This forum works best if you start a new topic for your new question, even if you find an existing topic that's similar (and this one in more than a year old). Further, it seems your question involves a municipal body which is no doubt subject to rules and laws which supersede RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted October 24, 2014 at 06:45 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2014 at 06:45 PM This forum works best if you start a new topic for your new question, even if you find an existing topic that's similar (and this one in more than a year old). Further, it seems your question involves a municipal body which is no doubt subject to rules and laws which supersede RONR. Well, a special rule of order is required in order for there to be a consent calendar regardless of whether or not this is a municipal body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted October 24, 2014 at 06:47 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2014 at 06:47 PM Well, a special rule of order is required in order for there to be a consent calendar regardless of whether or not this is a municipal body. If you say so. I have no idea what municipal bodies, and especially this municipal body, can and can't do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted October 24, 2014 at 06:56 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2014 at 06:56 PM If you say so. I have no idea what municipal bodies, and especially this municipal body, can and can't do. But you seem to think that, in this connection, the fact that this is a municipal body makes some sort of difference. It doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted October 24, 2014 at 11:57 PM Report Share Posted October 24, 2014 at 11:57 PM But you seem to think that, in this connection, the fact that this is a municipal body makes some sort of difference. It doesn't. I was only thinking that it might make some sort of difference. But if it doesn't, it doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Burns Posted October 27, 2014 at 02:57 AM Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 at 02:57 AM We shouldn't beat around the bush. The 'definitive answer' that Mr. Kuzmin is looking for is that this forum cannot answer his questions because they concern subjects that are not covered by Robert's Rules of Order. He must look, instead, to the special rules of order adopted by his city or county. Those are probably available online; if not, a call to his city or county administrator should get him a copy pretty quickly. If they have no adopted rules of order, then they probably haven't adopted Robert either! Generally speaking, most public bodies are required to allow public comment before action is taken on an item. This can either be while the item is up for discussion or during a public comment period at the beginning of the meeting. Some agencies will pull an item off consent if a member of the public fills out a speaker card; others simply expect the person to comment during the open comment period earlier. There are also exceptions; for example, the agency may be permitted to act without public comment if the legislation was discussed at a public hearing prior to this meeting. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted October 27, 2014 at 06:34 PM Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 at 06:34 PM Well, the "definitive" answer if the rules in RONR apply, is that yes, any ordinary main motions that could come up outside of a consent agenda could just as well come up on a consent agenda. Presumptions would include, among other things: that a consent agenda is authorized under some special rule of order or bylaws provision, and that no legal restriction to the use of consent agendas applies in this case. Whether a public comment would automatically remove an item from a consent agenda would depend on local rules, but generally I'd doubt it. Still, if I were a member of a body considering such an item, and one or more members of the public wished to comment on it, I might easily be persuaded to request that it be removed to the regular agenda. No harm except spending a little more time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.