Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Joshua Katz

    Agenda

    Agreeing with all the above, and limiting my answer to RONR, one session cannot bind another. If one session does purport to adopt an agenda for the next, the next can amend it freely. I'm not entirely sure what the vote threshold would be. Arguably, it should be the same as ASPA. On the other hand, I can see an argument that one session simply cannot adopt an agenda for another, so there's nothing to amend, just the business of adopting one (if you must or choose to). On a third hand, I can see an argument that the prior session can do so, but the rules in RONR, together with the act of doing so, equate to something like notice that it may be amended, so it can be amended by a majority vote.
  3. A committee of the whole is one of three mechanisms in RONR for considering items in a less formal manner. I'm not sure how well it fits, as opposed to consider informally, in a small board. The idea is that the entire assembly agrees to appoint a committee consisting of itself. Someone other than the chair presides, and, because it is now proceeding as a committee, less formal rules apply, and debate cannot be cut off by the motion for the previous question. Before returning from committee of the whole, the committee decides upon a recommendation it will make to the assembly, which then reconvenes, with its ordinary chair, and considers the recommendation. I'm not convinced it's the best fit here. So far as I can tell, the problem here seems to be a lack of time limits, not an excess of them. Also, it is generally for large bodies.
  4. What would be Considered a Committee of the whole? Is that our Board?
  5. Richard Brown

    Agenda

    I agree with Mr. Martin and would add that I have a hunch this is a public body, such as a city council or school board. If so, it is most likely subject to rules and procedures that outrank RONR .
  6. Josh Martin

    Agenda

    So far as RONR is concerned, yes. It’s somewhat unusual to set an agenda a week in advance, however, so I would be sure to check whether the assembly’s rules or applicable law provide otherwise on this subject. So far as RONR is concerned, an assembly which meets weekly would generally not have an agenda and would follow the standard order of business, but if it did have an agenda, it would set the agenda at the meeting itself.
  7. Guest

    Agenda

    During an agenda setting meeting, the majority voted that a certain subject couldn't be on the agenda for the regular meeting the following week. Is it possible to bring the item up for a vote anyway under "New Business" at the end of the regular meeting?
  8. Josh Martin

    cost of free speech

    We have not actually seen the text of the rule in question, but based upon the facts provided, I concur with my colleagues that the member is responsible for the cost of mailing the amendment to the committee. I do not believe there is any obligation in RONR for the society to pay for incoming mail. No to both questions.
  9. Thank you both for clarifying and for the advice, it is very helpful and appreciated.
  10. My guess is that the second statement is the reason why these meetings are dragging out. Perhaps your board should adopt a special rule of order that any non-motion subject that is raised is automatically referred to the Committee Of The Whole and each member has two minutes of debate time until the chairman puts the question as to what recommendation will be made to the board. Getting some structure around these issues will go a long way to clarify things, otherwise this board will be in a similar situation as the ancient British Parliament endlessly discussing subjects without an end in sight.
  11. When the minutes are pending for approval, the chair should ask for corrections. You can move at that point to amend by any of the usual means. Such motions are often handled by unanimous consent, but if it is lacking, it takes a majority vote. No, I'm saying the exact opposite. I'm saying a member can flap his gums and/or fingers, but cannot change the vote he cast at the meeting. If he regrets his vote, a motion to rescind at a later session, or to reconsider at the same session, may be appropriate. As for the minutes, they shouldn't show how any individual votes in the first place, unless the vote was by roll call. They should say if the motion carried or not. Regardless, no one can change his vote outside the meeting.
  12. Usually it is done informally and by unanimous consent. A member suggests, for example, "That the minutes be corrected to show that George Smith, rather than Cooter Brown, made the motion to buy a new laptop for the secretary". Or, "that the minutes be corrected to show that George's motion was amended to put a limit of $600 on the price of a new laptop for the secretary and that the minutes should be amended to add "at a cost not to exceed $600" at the end of the sentence. If there is no objection, the chair announces that the minutes will be corrected to show add "at a cost not to exceed $600" at the end of the sentence about the purchase of the laptop. If there is an objection, then the chair puts the proposed correction to a vote. it requires a majority vote to make the correction. The motion to make the correction is debatable. No. I think that what Mr. Katz meant is that that sounds like what the member was trying to do. It would not be at all proper.
  13. Is there a correct way to submit an amendment to minutes before they are approved? I don't understand. Are you saying that a member can change a vote they made in a meeting, after and outside of that meeting e.g. by emailing the Secretary the following day, and that their changed vote e.g. from Yes to No can be refected in the minutes prior to them being approved and without submitting an amendment to the Committee? Surely this change of vote couldn't just happen outside of a meeting without it been brought to the attention of other members in someway e.g. by submitting an ammendment prior to approval or an Amend /Rescind Something Previously Adopted?
  14. I agree with the others that no, your actual problem is insisting on treating the minutes like lecture notes. Let the members take their own notes if they must have memoranda, or appoint someone to do it as a separate task. But limit the official minutes to the decisions made and the actions taken and you will no longer waste time arguing over who said what.
  15. I agree with GWCTD. The bylaw provisions I have seen are way too vague. This one, among others, has me scratching my head. What on earth does that mean? Does that include appointing committee members and committee chairs?
  16. Request a chairperson from whom? I'm afraid your rules are too vague for anyone here to divine their meaning. If you think they are not being followed, raise a point or order and be prepared to appeal if you disagree with the ruling.
  17. Richard Brown

    Electronic Meeting/Voting

    If you are using the NAP website, you can go to this link and then click on your state. It will usually provide you with general information on local units around the state, contact info on the district director responsible for your state, and sometimes contact info on the state association president. Call or email the NAP office for whatever additional information you might want on local units in your area and the contact info for your state president. He or she might know of parliamentarians in your area who might be helpful. http://www.parliamentarians.org/about/nap-in-your-area/
  18. All of the part that I bolded is quite improper. As already pointed out, the minutes are a record of what was DONE at a meeting, not what was said. Debate does not belong in the minutes. Certain other information can be included in the minutes by direction of the assembly, but this should be rare and should be the exception, not the norm. Debate simply does not belong in the minutes.
  19. Benjamin Geiger

    Minutes record a meeting truthfully or the truth?

    Just to clarify: when I suggested it, I intended for it to be used on the motion in question, not on the minutes.
  20. Joshua Katz

    Electronic Meeting/Voting

    Yes. However, I second Mr. Brown's suggestion that you might be able to find a local NAP unit and have some experienced people, who are not RPs or PRPs, provide some advice.
  21. Yes, people vote based on the debate. But that doesn't change the fact that minutes are meant for recording the decisions of the assembly, not what individuals said. The real need in 10 years is to know what was decided, not which of many potentially conflicting reasons was the basis. Well, the Secretary could not do that. Until the minutes are approved, they are just the Secretary's notes. Given that the Secretary makes the changes, though, you can move to amend the pending minutes to cut out all the things that don't belong there. No, the member is exercising his vocal cords or fingers in a manner that resembles changing his vote after the meeting. What he's not doing is actually changing his vote. Unless you are voting by roll call, though, how he voted doesn't belong in the minutes, either. If the Secretary is changing the outcome of a vote based on this supposed vote-changing, then move to amend the minutes to correctly state if the motion was adopted or not based on what the meeting decided. I agree it is very helpful in this instance. For the future, though, Amend, before the minutes are approved (I personally like to say adopted, but everyone here jumps on me for saying it, despite the fact that we're all in agreement that the way to amend approved minutes is A/R SP Adopted), can be done by a majority vote, as opposed to the higher threshold or notice requirement of A/R SPA.
  22. Thank you for your replies. Yes, however often what is done is in large part determined by what is said, i.e. a vote will be influenced by the supporting information provided. The problem is that a particular member wishes to control the content of the minuted discussion points; he submits edits to the Secretary based on what he thinks should be reported rather than on what actually was discussed at the meeting. The Secretary makes the changes and we are running into constant conflict regarding the accuracy of the minutes. This member is also changing his vote after, and outside of, the meeting and the Secretary is actioning this change in the minutes of the meeting. Thank you for the suggestion of Amend /Rescind Something Previously Adopted, very useful.
  23. Shawn

    Electronic Meeting/Voting

    I went on the site you recommended and found a local Parliamentarian. I will reach out to her tomorrow. Do they typically charge for their service/advice?
  24. Joshua Katz

    Electronic Meeting/Voting

    RONR discusses the hierarchy of rules. Applicable procedural laws sit at the top, then your constitution/bylaws, then special rules of order, and then RONR, followed by standing rules. In the event of a conflict, the higher rule governs. So if the bylaws allow for voting without a meeting, voting is allowed without a meeting. That RONR defines a deliberative assembly as people able to hear each other might suggest that this isn't the best idea, but it doesn't prevent an organization from doing so. What's less certain is what your bylaws actually do, though. As I mentioned, I'm a part of several organizations which allow for asynchronous voting without a meeting. For example, in one, we had (I'm no longer a member) a 21 person board. To make a motion required 3 "cosponsors." Once made, voting was open for 10 days or until everyone had voted, during which time a person could change his vote.
  25. Shawn

    Electronic Meeting/Voting

    I totally agree these By-Laws are seriously lacking in so many areas but the organization does not have the funds to afford legal counsel to re-write. I will reach out to a professional parliamentarian as suggested to see if the can assist. However, I am confused on the response that voting can occur without a meeting. In order for a vote to occur there must be a motion put forth, I assume. Don't you need to have a meeting in order for a motion to be presented? I would assume a meeting is in person or electronic. If so, RONR notes that it is critical for aural communication to occur. The current process that we are following for these emergency votes lacks both a personal meeting, or an electronic meeting. There is no voice to voice discussion. Just text messages.
  1. Load more activity
×