Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

"discussion" vs. "discussion"


loose

Recommended Posts

Then skip the chit chat. Show up when the meeting is scheduled to start and insist that it start on time. If a majority of members have agreed on a question beforehand, there's not much you can do about it. It doesn't matter that they did so just before the meeting or a week before the meeting. And if two-thirds of the members want to close debate, there's not much you can do about that either.

Get more members to agree with you and the ball will be in your court.

Thanks for this advice. I will see what I can do./Loose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The trouble is that either your group doesn't understand RONR's guidelines for meetings or doesn't care to follow them if they do. If you can't get them to change this, you're beating your head against a wall.

Meetings are called to order by the presiding officer. You don't vote to start the meeting, because you only vote IN meetings, so that concept is silly.

If the meeting is scheduled for 7pm, that's when the meeting should start, not the coffee klatch.

If this is a small board (fewer than about a dozen in attendance) there's nothing wrong with the chair making motions. If not, then the chair has no business doing so.

If you want to hammer out the details before 7pm in a pre-meeting unofficial non-voting gathering, that's fine. But 1) there must still be the option for further debate between motion and voting (if the motion is debatable), and 2) if you're spending all the time you would normally spend in-meeting during debate in the "pre-meeting", then there is no time savings, and in fact it sounds like you spend more time than you would if you followed the rules, especially as they relate to the debate portion.

What about the rest of the "agenda"? Do you approve previous minutes? Hear reports? Address unfinished business? (just askin')

Your chair needs a.) a refresher course in RONR, or b.) to be replaced. Your membership needs some education as well.

But if there aren't enough disturbed by the current process and wanting to do it the right way, then step closer to that wall and start banging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Belated thanks for the clarification. Minutes are approved in the "RR" section of the meeting and New Business is allowed. I don't think there is ever any unfinished business but they always vote to adjourn even though there's no more business before us. Another issue is that we are handed an agenda and not asked to vote on it. Not sure where the agenda comes from. Sigh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another issue is that we are handed an agenda and not asked to vote on it. Not sure where the agenda comes from.

An agenda which is not approved by the assembly is not binding, regardless of where it comes from. See FAQ #14.

Of course, many assemblies have no need for an agenda at all and would do fine with the standard order of business in RONR, 10th ed., pg. 342.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is nonsense to vote to call a meeting to order, because until it's called to order you can't vote on anything. The chair simply calls the meeting to order promptly at the appointed start time.

You and anyone else has the right to discuss any debatable motion.

It's no surprise that the chit-chat is counterproductive and stifling. Your bylaws specify that Robert's Rules will be followed and it is the duty of EVERY member to insist that the bylaws are followed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's probably just a matter of the assembly not know how efficiently a meeting can and should run.

Loose, you might want to try the approach of, "why don't we try it the way the book says and see if that works any better."

Belated thanks for this practical advice. I'm a newbie myself. I have joined my local PA group to learn myself the joys of an orderly meeting so I know what my goal is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess my group needs to learn the distinction between dialogue and debate. To the uninitiated the term "discussion" implies dialogue between members. And as we are a small group, it's harder to keep modicum of formality. But we make decisions that affect 1000's of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest loose,

Please check in again. I'd like to see what eventuates.

... What's a "local PA group"?

(Do you perhaps mean a Parents' Association? If so ... do you really figure to "learn myself the joys of an orderly meeting" from it? Would you similarly expect to learn proper table manners from a group of crocodiles?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest loose,

Please check in again. I'd like to see what eventuates.

... What's a "local PA group"?

(Do you perhaps mean a Parents' Association? If so ... do you really figure to "learn myself the joys of an orderly meeting" from it? Would you similarly expect to learn proper table manners from a group of crocodiles?)

I guess I was trying to sling the lingo. I meant parliamentarian association. Sounds like you are hard bit.:-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well done, David.

Loose, you should probably start by talking to individual members to rally support for your wild idea about doing things the right way. It sounds like the assembly needs to take back control of their meetings from the chair. If the chair is not willing to remain impartial for the good of the assembly, he's not fit to preside. You're seeing first hand how the deliberative process breaks down when you don't have a chair who protects the rules of order and the rights of members.

Thanks for the validation. Scary prospect as I'm the new kid on the block. Stay tuned!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...