Maintaining Decorum

[mcfarland]

We are a nonprofit membership organization about to hold our annual meeting where approximately 100 "delegates" will each have one equal vote on questions.  We are anticipating a contentious meeting.  This is one of a few posts to this forum asking for advice on matters where our bylaws are silent or we are uninformed.  Thank you in advance for your advice.

 

Maintaining Proper Meeting Decorum.  What are some of the ways a Chair can maintain decorum at a meeting, if it should become contentious or unruly?

[Hieu H. Huynh]

"If a member commits only a slight breach of order - such as addressing another member instead of the chair in debate, or, in a single instance, failing to confine his remarks to the merits of the pending question - the chair simply raps lightly, points out the fault, and advises the member to avoid it." (RONR 11th ed., p. 645, ll. 22-27)

 

You can read further in this section for more serious offenses.

[Transpower]

The Chair should state the following at the beginning of the meeting:  

 

 

1.  Speakers (except for officers/committee chairs reporting) must address their remarks to the Chair, maintain a courteous tone, and avoid injecting a personal note into debate or attacking others’ motives.

 

2.  Officers and committee chairs should come to the front left, front right, or front center to present their reports and address the body.

 

3.  Speakers should refer to officers only by title and should avoid the mention of other members’ names as much as possible.

 

4.  Speakers’ remarks must be germane to the question before the assembly and should not be about a prior action not pending.

 

5.  Members are to stand when wishing to speak and when speaking, otherwise they are to sit.

 

6.  Members are to refrain from disturbing the assembly by whispering to one another, walking out, etc.

[Edgar Guest]

6. Members are to refrain from disturbing the assembly by whispering to one another, walking out, etc.

 

There's no need to shout.

 

"The key words here are disturb the assembly. This rule does not mean, therefore, that members can never whisper, or walk from one place to another in the hall during the deliberations of the assembly." (p.394)

[mcfarland]

Thank you all.

 

I understand the idea to "not disturb the assembly".  What actions would the Chair typically take to restore order if the assembly is disturbed, if raping the gavel does not do it?  Would the Chair recess the proceedings until order is restored?

 

Can the Chair call a motion "deleterious" and what are the effects of doing so?

[Gödel Fan]

Should firm but polite directions fail, the Chair may call the member to order.  Should that fail to work, the Chair directs the Secretary to record the indecorous actions, and if they persist, names the offender.  For offenses committed during a meeting, no separate trial is needed, since the members present at the meeting are the body that may assign penalties.  As Mr. Huynh said, this is described in the section he indicated.

 

The Chair, outside of small boards and committees, does not participate in debate (unless he hands off the gavel to do so) and so it doesn't matter if he thinks a motion is deleterious.  It matters if the Chair thinks a motion is out of order, and if so, he should rule it as such and briefly state his reason, which has the effect of not placing the question before the assembly, unless the ruling is overturned on appeal.  

 

Sometimes an action is called dilatory if it is clearly done simply to prevent the assembly from acting.  An example might be moving to adjourn 4 times, in rapid succession, with each motion failing, and only a minimal amount of meeting progress between each attempt; another example might be appealing a ruling when there can be no reasonable disagreement.  The Chair protects the assembly from dilatory actions, so dilatory actions are ruled out of order.  

[Josh Martin]

What actions would the Chair typically take to restore order if the assembly is disturbed, if rapping the gavel does not do it?

As an example, let's suppose a member speaks without obtaining the floor. If the member continues to speak after the chair tells him to stop, I'd try another warning or two. If he still persists, the chair addresses the member by name and may refer the matter to the assembly to determine the penalty. Ultimately, the member could be removed from the meeting if he won't behave (or even harsher penalties, if desired). But let's hope it doesn't come to that.

Would the Chair recess the proceedings until order is restored?

No. The chair does not have the authority to declare a recess (only the assembly can do this), and there is no need to stop the meeting because of the troublemakers. They should be dealt with swiftly and harshly if they will not maintain order.

Can the Chair call a motion "deleterious" and what are the effects of doing so?

"Deleterious" would suggest that the chair thinks the motion is in order, but is a bad idea, so no, he should not do that. The chair is to remain impartial.

The chair may rule a motion out of order as dilatory (which is perhaps the word you are looking for) if the motion is otherwise in order, but the chair has strong reason to believe that the motion is made for the purpose of wasting the assembly's time. For instance, a member who wishes to prevent a motion from being adopted might constantly offering the amendments to delay the assembly's progress. The chair should rarely do this - generally speaking, it is best to give members the benefit of the doubt.

There are also many other reasons a motion might be out of order.