D.Llama Posted October 5, 2016 at 02:49 AM Report Share Posted October 5, 2016 at 02:49 AM RONR provides that " a series of special orders or general orders - or a mixture of both - can be made ; such a series is called an agenda ".( p. 371 ll. 17-19) . This suggests that these items ( special and general orders ) alone can be an agenda ,or indeed perhaps that they are the only things that can constitute and form an agenda . Further on ( RONR, p. 371 ll. 25- 32 ).. " in an agenda " often an hour is assigned only to such subjects as the "calls to order , "recesses , adjournments" and ..." ..important items of business". And again , further on " these, then, are special orders for the time stated " . This suggests that the items referred to- " calls to order " etc., become special orders on the "agenda" . Finally , RONRIB p. 16, provides an example of an "Agenda " and planned adoption of that agenda is identified as point " II. " Question : 1) Is it because of the adoption, by majority vote , that all the listed items ( I to XII ) on the RONRIB example ( p 16), are thereby made general orders ( as no times on example p. 16 ),and by very virtue of that vote are accordingly " a series of special or general orders " - and therefore are called an "agenda "? 2) If before a meeting the President receives a request from a member to add an item to the proposed draft agenda ( e.g. RONRIB, agenda p. 16 ) under New Business, and there is no bylaw , notice requirement , or other customs that would preclude so doing may he/she simply adjust the draft agenda and add that in - so that it would be included in the final draft "agenda" that goes before the assembly for adoption.? Or should the member wanting this included be told to make a motion to amend - to add to the agenda this item - under " New Business " . Thank-you for any response - in advance ! Dllama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 5, 2016 at 05:03 PM Report Share Posted October 5, 2016 at 05:03 PM We read the texts the same way, but there are a couple of details worth noting (it seems to me)... If an agenda (i.e., list of things to bring up and when) is not adopted (either voted down or not presented by the author of the list in the first place) then any business items that would have been in the agenda as General or Special orders can be properly brought up as New Business, by whomever is interested in the item. Adopting an agenda doesn't preclude someone from bringing up something not on the agenda as New Business, later in the meeting. Specifically to your question 1): The footnote on p 16 of RONRIB is tricky. Since any RONR-Society already HAS an adopted order of business (meeting at least quarterly, see RONR, p. 353, line17ff.) it will require a 2/3 vote to adopt the agenda, if the "order-of-business" parts of that agenda departs from the RONR standard order of business, p. 353, OR some business part of the agenda is to be a Special Order. It looks to me that the RONRIB sample does NOT depart from the RONR Standard. Question 2) Yes, the author of the draft agenda can do what he/she pleases with it prior to presentation. BUT, if the member at the meeting, moves to include "his" item in the agenda (the author chose not to) it would NOT be "New Business" -- it would simply be another General Order when the agenda (as amended) was adopted. Anything in an adopted agenda is NOT "new business", it is a General or Special order. Finally, the list of mechanisms by which something can become a General Order on p. 365 is missing one additional possibility (#4): a bylaw amendment which has been given proper notice becomes a general order: p. 596, line 25. Interestingly, since a notice can be given in a call to a meeting, or by a single person at the preceding meeting, this means that, in this case, something (an amendment) can become a General Order without any vote by the assembly. Methods 1-3 all require a vote of some sort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest D.llama Posted October 5, 2016 at 11:16 PM Report Share Posted October 5, 2016 at 11:16 PM Thank-you Dr. Stackpole - I need some time to consider all that you have generously provided in the above response . Some of the nuances you point out are very helpful . "Agenda" seems a path that must be carefully tread - but no less so than other paths in RONR ! More response from this writer likely to follow in a few days . An initial notion is that even such matters as " Call to Order " and " Determination of Quorum " ( regardless of RONR p. 25 ll. 9-11; and p. 26, footnote) could be placed under the heading of "Agenda "- and thereby be included, as are all other matters listed - being made general or special orders by adoption of that very "Agenda " ? In this respect it seems of note that " Opening Ceremonies" ( RONR, p. 360,ll 33 ) are a listed item under the sample " Agenda ", in RONRIB p. 16. Very Much Obliged ! D.llama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 6, 2016 at 12:41 AM Report Share Posted October 6, 2016 at 12:41 AM As usual in the English language, words get a bit slippery from time to time as common usage bumps up against precise technical definitions. Per 371, line 17ff., agenda has the precise meaning of a list of specific business proposals (motions) which, by majority (or 2/3 depending) vote, have been set aside to be considered as Special and or General Orders at the appropriate place in the (standard) order of business. By adopting this agenda the association has assured itself that these items will get priority consideration over what might come up (without advance notice) under New Business. But the book, perhaps unfortunately, then promptly broadens the meaning to include parts of the standard order of business that have been assigned times - line 25ff. And just add to the complexity, these timed headings of the standard order, get referred to as special orders, as well. It's a bit of a jumble. And the whole meeting plan with times set for major parts can get described as the agenda for the entire meeting. (And that can be called a "program", p. 373, as well.) About the only way to be sure what is being talked about is to consider the context of what someone is describing (and memorize pages 371-375). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest D.llama Posted October 6, 2016 at 01:11 AM Report Share Posted October 6, 2016 at 01:11 AM "Complexity" and "jumble" - indeed, Dr Stackpole .The reference in my latter post to " calls to order " (p.371,ll 25 -30 ) becoming a " special order" - if a time is provided and a "general order ", if a time is not provided, attracts those adjectives . And that seems to be so - notwithstanding that RONR provides in the footnote on p. 26, that it is not proper to list a "call to order " as the first item in.an order of or business or agenda .It seems it could well be so listed if "calls to order " is intended as inclusive . If I be wrong in this conclusion please do put me right > Thank-you again - very helpful ! D.llama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted October 6, 2016 at 11:38 AM Report Share Posted October 6, 2016 at 11:38 AM 10 hours ago, jstackpo said: As usual in the English language, words get a bit slippery from time to time as common usage bumps up against precise technical definitions. Per 371, line 17ff., agenda has the precise meaning of a list of specific business proposals (motions) which, by majority (or 2/3 depending) vote, have been set aside to be considered as Special and or General Orders at the appropriate place in the (standard) order of business. By adopting this agenda the association has assured itself that these items will get priority consideration over what might come up (without advance notice) under New Business. But the book, perhaps unfortunately, then promptly broadens the meaning to include parts of the standard order of business that have been assigned times - line 25ff. And just add to the complexity, these timed headings of the standard order, get referred to as special orders, as well. It's a bit of a jumble. And the whole meeting plan with times set for major parts can get described as the agenda for the entire meeting. (And that can be called a "program", p. 373, as well.) About the only way to be sure what is being talked about is to consider the context of what someone is describing (and memorize pages 371-375). Oh, for heaven sake stop making this more complicated and confusing than need be. "When an hour is assigned to a particular subject in an agenda, that subject is thereby made a special order unless, by footnote or other means, it is stated that the time is intended merely for guidance, in which case the subject is only a general order. Subjects for which no hour is specified in an agenda are general orders." (RONR, 11th ed., p. 371) Note that this is all inclusive, and also note that nowhere does it say that an agenda is "a list of specific business proposals (motions)". It can be, and usually is, much broader than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.Llama Posted October 6, 2016 at 03:26 PM Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2016 at 03:26 PM Mr Honemann ,with respect , it strikes this writer that the complication and confusion is driven in this connection in great part by the wrinkles , nuances and inherent confusion of the language applied in RONR, and not otherwise . The discussions above seek to clarify . If the text in RONR is so convoluted that a person of Dr. Stackpole's years of experience ( although not of the editorial team -past or current ) considers it "complex" and a" jumble" that would seem to suggest that the text is arguably problematic in this area . It certainly is for me - it borders on the unintelligible when all in , and this without any intention or wish to make this " more complicated " than need be .Indeed ,the intent is just the opposite - which is - to roll this out and pin it down for the sole purpose of clarification . But to be fair , perhaps Dr Stackpole and I, are outliers in this struggle and the vast majority of Forum users do not consider this area something of a troublesome Gordian Knot . Obliged regardless -for your response . Dllama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted October 7, 2016 at 06:43 AM Report Share Posted October 7, 2016 at 06:43 AM Why do you feel that you have a need for an agenda in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dllama Posted October 7, 2016 at 04:54 PM Report Share Posted October 7, 2016 at 04:54 PM Mr Novosielski : These questions were not about whether or not an "agenda " was needed - that is not the concern . And for sure if an "agenda " is not needed the sky is clear and without impediment . But when an "agenda " is wanted and RONR is searched and studied for aid and assistance - reasonable clarity seems in short supply . RONR is a great work - beyond question - but in this specific area I consider it fails somewhat - ar least for me .Its even difficult to say exactly what the core problem is and to get hold of the thing to unravel the acknowledged "complexity" . Part of it seems to be driven by the circumstance that items that are in a standard " order of business " are also potentially in an " agenda " . The example provided on p. 16 of RONRIB makes that clear . But for the average reader ( myself included in that cohort ) when one comes comes to the appreciation that an "agenda " is "a series of special orders or general orders " ..it is natural to then search out what " special orders " and" general orders" actually are - according to RONR . The index to RONR can then take one to " general order " (p.358 ,Lloyd 13-15 ) and "special order " ( p.364 ll 33-35 ) for definitional purposes . A " general order " is arguably defined as any " question" which " has been made " an order of the day and a special order is also one "made ", but with a temporal context - to it . Since the motion to " postpone " is associated with the making of a general order ( p. 358, ll 10 ) the reader ( ar least this one ) tends to initially consider/conclude that these "orders" that make up a proper and authorized RONR " agenda " are matters that were made at an earlier meeting and only such matters are within the scope of what an " agenda " is . But then - when this same average reader reviews the example on p. 16 of RONRIB he/she observes that an "agenda " - one to be adopted - has items found in a standard order of business (p. 353) and this arrangement ,as well as content respecting the definitional meaning of " agenda " ( p. 371 ,ll 25-30 ), is one that possibly embraces items made , and items to be made, by adoption of the proposed agenda . That being so even an initial "call to order " can be in an " agenda "regardless that the reader was cautioned on an earlier read not to have " call to order " in an agenda ( p . 26 footnote ). If any of this is accurate one might think that just about anything under the sun can go in an " agenda " be that the will of the assembly and this would conform with RONR ? Regrets for wasting the time here of Mr. Novosielski ( should he read this ) -by this self indulgent foray into this subject . This unloading was not at all sought - and may indeed be unwelcome - but it has at least served to help this writer capture some of the threads in his own mind as to the complexity of the topic . If this blather has anything at all that is accurate ,or useful, perhaps it would be worth consideration that there be clarification in the next edition of RONR , on this score - the average reader must tread too hard a road to filter what is correct in this connection( I do think it ) - be these observations in any respect accurate . Thank- you . Dllama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Posted October 10, 2016 at 04:45 AM Report Share Posted October 10, 2016 at 04:45 AM Does the statement on page 352, lines 2 – 6 help clarify the situations? Although the terms order of business, agenda, and program relate primarily to the business of an entire session, the same terms are also applied to a part of the whole, in speaking of "the order of business," "the agenda," or "the program" of a meeting within a session. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.Llama Posted October 10, 2016 at 10:53 PM Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2016 at 10:53 PM Hi Leo : Thank-you for the note - however, it provides no help to me specifically. If it is of help to you - perhaps you could explain how- so respecting what is raised above ? For those who consider that there is indeed " complexity" that seems driven by the definitional context of "agenda" (orders made ) p. 364 LN 33-35. But a review of the example agenda on p. 16 RONRIB identifies possibly "made " ( e.g. postponed ; various items earlier made ) items on the agenda for a proposed meeting ,but also things that will be made when this agenda is adopted . And it contains headers that are equally applicable for standard order of business . The question then : What can be on an agenda (?) can seemingly ( p. 16 RONRIB ) include the following : 1) All calls to Order/ Recesses /Adjournments ( RONR p. 360 ,LL 25-30 ) - regardless of footnote- bottom of p. 26 2) Particularly important items of business ( 360 ) 3) Unfinished Business and business made orders from an earlier meeting ; 4) Opening Ceremonies ( RONR p. 360,ll 25 -25) an optional item - sometimes located in regular meetings ; 5) Program 6) AND - Other An agenda then contains ,apparently, any item of "business" ( even -"Invocation" - RONRIB p. 16 ) that the President is pleased to draft on the agenda and the assembly is pleased to adopt. And arguably a " Call to Order " , as a first item in an "agenda " ( 26 footnote ), or perhaps a "Determination of Quorum" ( RONR p. 348 LL 34 ff). The real problem is to tease this out of the text - that is - an "agenda" shall be what the assembly determines to adopt as the agenda .It is not limited to orders made from past meetings ,some or all header subjects on a standard order of business , nor does it necessarily exclude what RONR says it shall not include ( Call to Order ; Quorum , etc ) . Its getting to this that can be a struggle for the average reader . Thanks Leo . Dllama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted October 11, 2016 at 12:53 PM Report Share Posted October 11, 2016 at 12:53 PM 14 hours ago, D.Llama said: The real problem is to tease this out of the text - that is - an "agenda" shall be what the assembly determines to adopt as the agenda .It is not limited to orders made from past meetings ,some or all header subjects on a standard order of business , nor does it necessarily exclude what RONR says it shall not include ( Call to Order ; Quorum , etc ) . Its getting to this that can be a struggle for the average reader . Thanks Leo . Well, one certainly would hope that it will be a struggle for the average reader to find any of this in RONR. Nothing in RONR suggests that items which may be placed on an agenda are in any way limited to "orders made from past meetings" and "some or all header subjects on a standard order of business", and, of course, there is nothing in RONR indicating that what should not be included is not necessarily excluded. Nothing in RONR suggests that it would be proper to list a "call to order" as the first item in an agenda, and there isn't anything at all which refers to including or excluding something called "Determination of Quorum" (or anything like it) . Heaven only knows what "etc." refers to here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest D.Llama Posted October 11, 2016 at 05:17 PM Report Share Posted October 11, 2016 at 05:17 PM 1) RONR p . 358 ll 13-15 - "a general order,is any question which , usually by postponement , has been made..."..this suggests that past made orders - are , ( agreed) not necessarily exhaustive content on an agenda , but are certainly the norm . It draws the reader backwards and not at all forwards . If the reader were alerted ,even with a footnote on this page, that an agenda can embrace general and special orders both made , and to be made , by construction of the current agenda, that would be helpful for some readers . Perhaps you see no need at all Mr Honemann for additional direction - and that the text is perfectly clear, but for some - it's not . The ( I claim ) confusion that can arise from the standard order of business headers is the use of some, but not all, in the sample agenda p. 16 RONRIB . Why are the headers special and general orders not used - while New Business and others are . Indeed those two headers - special and general - are somewhat definitional in context for an agenda- but get no ink . Is it because it's obvious they are in or not in use in the example on p.16 . Item X on the example agenda concerns "consideration of purchase of New Headquartes " . Where did it arise from ?. Is it a general Oder from an earlier meeting, or otherwise , and if it is the former why is there no header of " Unfinished Business and General Orders" . Can all headers for a standard order of business be used in an agenda ? Some are in the example - some are not .The reader is left uncertain in this connection . Maybe in the example ( p16) the " consideration of new headquarters " is a general order by virtue of it being added in as a new item but if so why is it not identified under a header of General Order, or for that matter "New Business . To quote Dr. Stackpole - it's a "jumble " and I may be in error but I thought you as well ( Mr Honemann ) indicated at some point , above- that it be " complex " . Why is this so complex and confusing ? As for "Call to Order " as a first item in an agenda p. 371 ll. 25ff, " In an agenda ..........as the calls to order, recesses ...." . Although p 26 footnote of RONR prohibits Call to Order as first item - here it is stated that " calls to order" are permitted on an agenda . But apparently this allowance for "calls to order " is qualified ,entirely by the footnote , about 350 pages earlier on .One cannot, however , in the view of this writer , be much critical of the reader ( and agenda drafter ) who inserts call to order as a first item of business based on the above p. 371 . I do not disagree that p . 26 footnote states as it does . But again why is this RONR content provided in such a way that the average reader cannot get a somewhat clear answer at the outset - agenda is a subject arising in every meeting - it should , may I propose ,be a subject covered in RONR that allows for better ease and access . My little experience in reviewing agenda is that many organizations have -call to order - as an initial item in the agenda and no harm is done when that arises . And although a different point - this begs the question ,for me at least - why is it said to be improper as a first item in an agenda . Perhaps If there is any reply from Mr Honemann he can enlighten on this . If Invocation and Pledge to Allegianca are suitable things " made " on an agenda - why not call to order ? This response , however , is primarily directed at the unecessary confusion and complexity for the " normal " reader of RONR respecting agenda content . One who "braves it " and hopes to find a "self - explanatory " text best conveying understanding of the entire subject matter ( RONRIB p. 7). Thank - you : Dllama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Goldsworthy Posted October 11, 2016 at 05:38 PM Report Share Posted October 11, 2016 at 05:38 PM 29 minutes ago, Guest D.Llama said: The ( I claim ) confusion that can arise from the standard order of business headers is the use of some, but not all, in the sample agenda p. 16 RONRIB . Why are the headers special and general orders not used - while New Business and others are . The problem is the OUTLINE format. There are rules for the creation of an OUTLINE. • You never have an outline with only a single item "A" under a Roman numeral. RONR-IB's page 16 follows this rule. But D. Llama thinks that the rules of OUTLINE FORMAT should be violated, by using headers with a single ("A") item under header. This is not a question about Robert's Rules of Order. This is a question closer to to the Chicago Manual of Style or Gardner's Standard Usage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted October 11, 2016 at 07:10 PM Report Share Posted October 11, 2016 at 07:10 PM 1 hour ago, Guest D.Llama said: 1) RONR p . 358 ll 13-15 - "a general order,is any question which , usually by postponement , has been made..."..this suggests that past made orders - are , ( agreed) not necessarily exhaustive content on an agenda , but are certainly the norm . It draws the reader backwards and not at all forwards . If the reader were alerted ,even with a footnote on this page, that an agenda can embrace general and special orders both made , and to be made , by construction of the current agenda, that would be helpful for some readers . Perhaps you see no need at all Mr Honemann for additional direction - and that the text is perfectly clear, but for some - it's not . No, general and special orders created by the adoption of a motion to Postpone are definitely not normal things to be found on an agenda because, as is explained at the top of page 372, agendas are normally adopted by organizations whose meetings are not held within quarterly time intervals. Nothing can be postponed to the next meeting if that meeting will not be held within a quarterly time interval. Nor can there be any such thing as unfinished business at the beginning of the meeting. When the standard order of business described on pages 353-363 is the prescribed order of business for regular meetings of an organization, there is seldom, if ever, any need for the adoption of an agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 11, 2016 at 07:45 PM Report Share Posted October 11, 2016 at 07:45 PM And, I take it, that adopting RONR as the ParlAuth in the bylaws makes the "Standard Order" the prescribed order for regular (at least quarterly) meetings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted October 11, 2016 at 07:47 PM Report Share Posted October 11, 2016 at 07:47 PM 1 minute ago, jstackpo said: And, I take it, that adopting RONR as the ParlAuth in the bylaws makes the "Standard Order" the prescribed order for regular (at least quarterly) meetings. Yes. RONR (11th ed.), p. 353, ll. 17-26 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.Llama Posted October 12, 2016 at 02:19 AM Author Report Share Posted October 12, 2016 at 02:19 AM Hmmmm . It seems that Mr's Honemann, Stackpole , and Mervosh are all in agreement and the thing is pretty much cut and dry and ought to be easily grasped with sufficient effort ! And I accordingly throw in the towel on this topic . I must now consider myself less able than most in connection with ability to grasp what is right there in front of my face ( apparently ) - in the text of RONR . However, I do do not think I'm at all alone in this respect and there are others that likewise struggle with this topic . I nevertheless thank for your patience . Much Obliged for the "ink" expended . Dllama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.