Consent Agenda Items

[CindySS]

What items can be included on a consent agenda?  Specifically, can routine reports be included or only motions?

[Hieu H. Huynh]

Your organization could decide the details of a consent agenda.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

11 minutes ago, CindySS said:

What items can be included on a consent agenda?  

Specifically, can routine reports be included or only motions?

It would highly irregular to put a committee report or officer report on a consent agenda.

"To adopt a committee report" is to adopt 100% of the text as the official statement of the organization.

And most committee reports and officer reports are in the nature of "status reports," and contain no action item to adopt.

***

Q. What are you adopting via your consent agenda?

 

[CindySS]

I am finding 2 interpretations of this, and I am being sent to Roberts Rules to have a concrete answer.  Almost every reference I find includes "reports", including from the National Council on Non-Profits.

We are a Not-For-Profit organization with a Board of Directors that meets 4-5 times per year.  

Natl Council of NonProfits.pdf

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Q. Is THIS what you are doing with your consent agenda regarding your reports?

>> excerpt, page 508, Section 51 <<

Quote

 

EQUIVALENCE OF TERMS; INCORRECT MOTIONS. 
As applied to an assembly's action with respect to board or committee reports or any of their contents, the expressions adopt, accept, and agree to are all equivalent―that is, the text adopted becomes in effect the act or statement of the assembly.  It is usually best to use the word adopt, however, since it is the least likely to be misunderstood.

A common error is to move that a report “be received” after it has been read―apparently on the supposition that such a motion is necessary in order for the report to be taken under consideration or to be recorded as having been made.  In fact, this motion is meaningless, since the report has already been received.  Even before a report has been read, a motion to receive it is unnecessary if the time for its reception is established by the order of business, or if no member objects (see also below).

Another error―less common, but dangerous―is to move, after the report has been read (or even before the reading), that it “be accepted,” when the actual intent is that of the mistaken motion to receive, as just explained, or of a legitimate motion to receive made before the report is read.  If a motion “to accept” made under any of these circumstances is adopted and is given its proper interpretation, it implies that the assembly has endorsed the complete report.

 

 

[Kim Goldsworthy]

"Oy!" "Beware!"

That PDF document is NOT in compliance with Robert's Rules of Order.

See one excerpt from that PDF document.

Quote

 

Q. What normally is found on a consent agenda?

Routine, informational, procedural and self-explanatory non-controversial items are generally placed on the consent portion of the agenda. These typically are such things as:
    • Correspondence requiring no action
    • Committee and staff reports
    • Updates or background reports provided for informational purposes only

 

Out of 9 bullet items listed in the answer to that question, at least 3 bullet items (see my excerpt above) would never appear on a consent agenda where compliance with Robert's Rules of Order was intended.

Why not?
Because:

(a.) you don't adopt "correspondence requiring no action".

(b.) you don't adopt "committee reports" (100% of the text) or "staff reports" (100% of the text).

(c.) you don't adopt "updates, or background reports provided for informational purposes only."

[Dan Honemann]

16 hours ago, CindySS said:

What items can be included on a consent agenda?  Specifically, can routine reports be included or only motions?

 

16 hours ago, CindySS said:

I am finding 2 interpretations of this, and I am being sent to Roberts Rules to have a concrete answer.  Almost every reference I find includes "reports", including from the National Council on Non-Profits.

We are a Not-For-Profit organization with a Board of Directors that meets 4-5 times per year.  

Natl Council of NonProfits.pdf

As far as the rules in Robert's Rules of Order are concerned, an organization is free to adopt a special rule of order establishing a consent calendar (agenda, as you call it), and this special rule of order may allow for the inclusion on the consent calendar of whatever the assembly wishes to allow to be included on it. (RONR, 11th ed., p. 361)

In other words, the answer to both of your questions is yes.

[action jackson]

The RONR does state to make a motion to approve or to accept a report is seldom wise. Although I can agree, as we all would, that societies can create special rules, some of those rules may be considered somewhat minor while other major. To accept reports would be considered a major special rule and hence inadvisable simply based on the RONR.

Using RONR to interpret RONR, reports need to stay out of a Consent Calendar... it is information, not something to act on.
A motion would come into play if:
1) a recommendation was made within the report or
2) an action arises out of the information provided in the report
The society/board can then act (or not act) by making a motion on the recommendation/action, not the report.

Reference: RONR, 11th ed., pgs 361; 506-508

Other discussions on the matter...

 

[Dan Honemann]

The question asked is can routine reports be included on a consent calendar, and the correct answer to this question is yes, they can, if the special rule of order establishing the consent calendar so provides. Doing so will certainly not violate any rule in RONR.

It is important to note that, as far as RONR is concerned, unless the special rule of order establishing a consent calendar provides otherwise, the matters placed on a consent calendar are taken up in order, unless objected to, and are considered under the rules just as any other business. As stated in RONR, "the 'consent' relates only to permitting the matter to be on the calendar for consideration without conforming to the usual, more onerous, rules for reaching measures in the body." Nothing in RONR requires that items placed on a consent calendar be "accepted", "adopted", or "agreed to".

[action jackson]

Let us remember that these are for matters "for consideration" i.e. a matter in which action may be involved. (previously mentioned, pg. 361)

A report for informational purposes does not meet that criteria.

The items on a consent calendar are there to be considered, hence "consent"

The question was asked if they "can"... the word to look at though is "routine" - the question that has to be asked before a report is placed on the consent calendar is, does the report have a recommendation, a matter to be considered, or any requested motions? If it does not, and is simply for information only, then obviously that type of report should stay off the consent calendar.

[Dan Honemann]

12 hours ago, action jackson said:

Let us remember that these are for matters "for consideration" i.e. a matter in which action may be involved. (previously mentioned, pg. 361)

A report for informational purposes does not meet that criteria.

The items on a consent calendar are there to be considered, hence "consent"

The question was asked if they "can"... the word to look at though is "routine" - the question that has to be asked before a report is placed on the consent calendar is, does the report have a recommendation, a matter to be considered, or any requested motions? If it does not, and is simply for information only, then obviously that type of report should stay off the consent calendar.

Mr. Jackson, I understand that, in your opinion, reports submitted for information only should not be placed on a consent calendar because no action on them is necessary, but there is nothing at all in RONR which suggests that an organization's special rule of order establishing a consent calendar cannot allow for the inclusion of such reports on it.

[action jackson]

6 hours ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

Mr. Jackson, I understand that, in your opinion, reports submitted for information only should not be placed on a consent calendar because no action on them is necessary, but there is nothing at all in RONR which suggests that an organization's special rule of order establishing a consent calendar cannot allow for the inclusion of such reports on it.

Treasurer Reports?

[Richard Brown]

1 minute ago, action jackson said:

Treasurer Reports?

I agree with Mr. Honemann that nothing in RONR prohibits an organization from adopting a special rule of order placing whatever items of business that it wants to on the consent calendar.   Whether we think it is good policy is not the issue.

[Dan Honemann]

Mr. Jackson is apparently under the misapprehension that if something has been placed on a consent calendar and is allowed to remain there, RONR says that it must be acted upon (by being either adopted or rejected), or, perhaps, that it is assumed to be adopted by unanimous consent, no matter what the organization's special rule of order creating the consent calendar says.

But even if RONR were to say such a thing (which, of course, it does not), it would be of no consequence since the provisions of the organization's special rule of order creating the consent calendar will take precedence.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Quote

What is a consent agenda?

  A consent agenda groups the routine, procedural, informational and self-explanatory non-controversial items typically found in an agenda. These items are then presented to the board in a single motion for an up or down vote after allowing anyone to request that a specific item be moved to the full agenda for individual attention. Other items, particularly those requiring strategic thought, decision making or action, are handled as usual.

The above text is an excerpt from the PDF document the original poster had uploaded.

Here, the anwer to the question of the consent agenda says, "These items are then presented to the board in a single motion for an up or donw vote [...]."

That implies that things like (a.) "status reports" and (b.) "reports containing no recommendations", are to be adopted, officially.

That is the very practice which RONR expresses warns against.

***

An organization is free to use a consent agenda any way it wishes to, via an adoption of a special rule of order.

But such usage (viz., to adopt information-only reports) violates the clear warning in RONR. (namely, to adopt 100% of the text of an information-only report).

No one is contending that the organization (a.) cannot adopt a special rule of order, and (b.) cannot put information-only reports into its consent agenda.

But someone should warn that nonprofit organization that to adopt such a consent agenda,  "it implies that the assembly has endorsed the complete report." [see page 508 of RONR].

And, THAT is something which puts the organization at risk.

 

[action jackson]

Exactly Mr. Goldsworthy. I am not on any misapprehension on anything, I am simply not being one sided on the issue when it comes to the RONR.

Can you do it, sure, create the special rule and go against the recommendation with respect to what the rest of the RONR says. I guess, being human, anyone can drink and then decide to drive... doesn't make it right to do so just because you are holding the keys.

[Dan Honemann]

It is gratifying to learn that no one is now under the erroneous impression that, under the rules in RONR, matters placed on a consent calendar and allowed to remain there must be acted upon by being either adopted or rejected, or, alternatively, are assumed to be adopted by unanimous consent, neither of which is true. Such will be the case only if the special rule of order creating the consent calendar specifically says so. If it does not, matters placed on the consent calendar and allowed to remain there are simply taken up in order, and are considered under the rules just as any other business. As a consequence, as far as the rules in RONR are concerned, there is certainly nothing inherently wrong with placing reports, even those submitted for information only, on a consent calendar.

As I understand it now, I must have been mistaken in thinking that some of the previous responses were meant to indicate otherwise. I gather now that those responses were meant simply to indicate that it would be a bad mistake to adopt a special rule of order which not only allows for inclusion of reports submitted for information only, but also provides that when items on the calendar are called up and not objected to (and thus removed from the calendar) they are presented to the assembly in a single motion for an up or down vote, or, alternatively, are deemed to be adopted by unanimous consent. I'm quite sure that no one would disagree with this.

 

 

 

[action jackson]

Well, you can look at it as two questions, both with the answer of "yes"...

You can place the items there on the calendar, yes
To do so would be a bad mistake, yes

A wonderful quote to keep in mind:
Ian Malcolm: "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should." (Jurassic Park)

- Peace

[Dan Honemann]

42 minutes ago, action jackson said:

Well, you can look at it as two questions, both with the answer of "yes"...

You can place the items there on the calendar, yes
To do so would be a bad mistake, yes

To do so would be a bad mistake only if the adopted special rule of order also provides that when items on the calendar are called up and not objected to (and thus removed from the calendar) they are presented to the assembly in a single motion for an up or down vote, or, alternatively, are deemed to be adopted by unanimous consent, or something of the sort.

The questions as originally posited indicated no such thing.