Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Watson

Members
  • Content Count

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Watson

  • Rank
    Dr. Robert T. Workinger
  • Birthday 03/08/1944

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Saint Germain, Wisconsin
  • Interests
    Musky Fishing; Substitute Teaching; Hunter Safety Education
  1. The bylaws read: "The presiding officer shall . . . conduct the proceedings of the meeting in accordance with the parliamentary rules contained in Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised, unless otherwise provided by statute or by the rules in this chapter." Recently, after researching a topic, I quoted RONR (11th ed.). Immediately another member stated that this was incorrect and that I must reference the 10th Edition because that was the edition in use when the bylaws were written and approved. Not wishing to be confrontational, is there an Official Interpretation to which I may refer in response? Thank you, RTW
  2. [if my question is beyond the scope of this Forum, I will understand.] If the bylaws require that certain types of resolutions (e.g. ordinance) be read twice before the assembly prior to voting: (1) Must the readings be at consecutive regular meetings, or could the readings take place , say, anytime within a quarterly interval? (2) Is discussion/debate in order after the first reading? (3) If the resolution is amended, either on the floor or by committee, is an additional reading required? Thank you, RTW
  3. RONR, p. 503, ll. 24-28: "In the case of a committee, however, if it is impractical to bring its members together for a meeting, the report of the committee can contain what has been agreed to by every one of its members." Gary & George -- Maybe my interpretation was incorrect. This committee cannot hold a totally electronic meeting because of the problem of complying with the state open meetings law. Therefore, at a bi-monthly regular meeting with a quorum present, what vote is necessary to immediately report out its recommendation to the assembly?
  4. Our standing committee meets on the first and third Mondays of the month, and the assembly to which the committee reports meets on the second and fourth Tuesdays of the month. Business automatically referred to our committee frequently requires reporting committee recommendations to the assembly within one to eight days. If all members of the committee are present at a meeting, and the committee recommendations are unanimously approved by counted votes, the report satisfies the requirement of RONR, p. 503, ll. 24-28. Question No.1: If a recommendation is approved by less than a unanimous vote, or if one of the committee members abstains, must submission of the committee recommendation to the assembly wait until after a subsequent meeting of the committee? Question No. 2: Given the presence of a quorum, can the instructions to the comittee be amended to allow an absent individual to vote by electronic signature on an otherwise unanimously approved recommendation? Thank you for your attention and thoughts!
  5. JOINT MEETING RTW Members Our Council [11 Members] has appointed a Board of [5] Commissioners. Now we would like all 16 individuals to meet jointly in a special meeting with equal status and parliamentary rights. Does RONR propose a proper format for such a meeting? Should the presiding officer be a third party, or chosen from within the group? #2 Professional Registered Parliamentarian Members Does RONR propose a proper format for such a meeting? No. The term "joint meeting" is not used in RONR (except in the case of a merger of two societies, which does not apply here). I can think of two ways to establish a joint meeting. One of the assemblies (probably the council, in this case) could create a special committee consisting of all the members of both assemblies, or you could hold a mass meeting which invites all the members of both assemblies (the joint meeting used to merge societies is the latter type). RTW Should the presiding officer be a third party, or chosen from within the group? That's up to the assembly. If you go the special committee route, you can have the assembly which appoints the committee select the chairman or leave it to the committee to elect its own chairman. A mass meeting elects its own chairman. #3 Edgar RTW Now we would like all 16 individuals to meet jointly in a special meeting with equal status and parliamentary rights. Aside from the right to attend and speak (a courtesy that can be afforded to non-members), what's the point? This combination of bodies wouldn't constitute a body in its own right so any votes that were taken and decisions made would be, I think, immaterial. To put it another way, what do you hope to accomplish at this joint gathering that couldn't be accomplished at a meeting of the council to which the commissioners were invited to attend and speak? #4 Members Parliamentary rights to do what? And in the name of which body? I don't understand how an appointed board, presumably a subordinate body to the council, can have equal status in a meeting. If both bodies are meeting, and a motion passes, which body passed it? #5 Members Gary Novosielski Parliamentary rights to do what? And in the name of which body? I don't understand how an appointed board, presumably a subordinate body to the council, can have equal status in a meeting. If both bodies are meeting, and a motion passes, which body passed it? By taking Mr. Martin's answer to a logical next step, the board and committee could be appointed to a special committee, proceeding to conduct a committee hearing regarding some significant pending business.
  6. The Assembly must elect four of its members to four identical positions on a committee. There is no rule as to how the election is to be conducted. By default, should each candidate be voted on separately in the order of nomination until four have received a majority from those present and voting? If four or more members are nominated, but many of us are willing to vote for the election of only three of the nominees, can a motion to elect by Plurality-at-Large voting be passed at this time, or must the motion be made before the call for nominations? [in Plurality-at-Large voting all candidates run against each other for n number of positions. Each voter selects up to n candidates on the ballot, and the n candidates with the most votes win the positions. Voters are niot allowed to vote for the same candidate more than once.] Thank you.
  7. If I feel that an item of business placed on the Consent Agenda should be debated and voted on separately, how do I get that one item moved to the regular order of business? Thank you.
  8. Many thanks to David, Dan and Josh. Dan, would you please expand on the statement in RONR: "This calendar is called over periodically at a point established in the agnda by special rule of order, at least preceding standing committee reports." (This was the source of my reference to a special rule of order; so is such a rule needed or not?) Our assembly does have a fixed Order of Business which includes a Consent Calendar. No other document otherwise mentions a consent calendar or any limitations therein on debate or amendment. As always; I appreciate the enlightenment!
  9. Here is another, 'That's the way we've always done it!' situation. Back in the day, our assembly decided that they should utilize a Consent Agenda (but never bothered to pass a Special Rule of Order to that effect). The current presiding officer and many of his colleagues insist that a motion (seconded; majority vote) is necessary to remove an item of business from the Consent Agenda for discussion, etc., during the regular order of business. "Don't quote RONR to me; those are just guidelines and it doesn't say that you don't have to make a motion!" Unfortunately, business that should be debated, and might possibly NOT be approved by majority vote, is thereby left on the Consent Agenda to be approved en bloc along with everything else. If I raise a Point of Order, what evidence/explanation/quotation can I present to the Chair so that he will rule my Point 'Well Taken'?
  10. In the case of a Standing Committee that never meets, is never used, etc., would someone please help me with the proper language for a motion to remove this Committee from the bylaws. Thank you very much/
  11. Am tired of reading that, "The motion died for lack of a second." What is the proper form by which this should be entered into the minutes?
  12. Our Council [11 Members] has appointed a Board of [5] Commissioners. Now we would like all 16 individuals to meet jointly in a special meeting with equal status and parliamentary rights. Does RONR propose a proper format for such a meeting? Should the presiding officer be a third party, or chosen from within the group? Thank you.
  13. Thanks, Wonk. The Commissioners are citizens-at-large appointed by the Council. I forgot that the Standard Order of Business includes the item, Comments by the Aldermen, immediately after Approval of the Minutes; it is never used, but I would consider this the appropriate time. In order to speak at the end of the meeting, E should have asked for General Consent to bring it up at a different time.
  14. SITUATION Note: The Council only appoints commissioners to five-year terms; all other authority is delegated to the Commission. "At the end of the [November] meeting of the Council, both G and E requested placing on the agenda 'at the [December] meeting' a discussion of the XYZ Commission." " " [E] has been receiving a lot of imput [by phone, & outside of regular meetings] from other members who DEMANDED that he bring this to the floor." "It was agreed that [E] would only summarize the complaints so the Commission could hear [in December] what they will need to respond to in January." E later stated, "I was speaking for at least a contingent of the [members] when I summarized their grievances with the XYZ Commission." QUESTIONS Was this presentation, without a motion, properly brought to the floor in December? Can E properly claim that he was, indeed, speaking for at least a contingent [of which I am not a part]? If I had raised a point of order before Estarted speaking, how could the Point have been worded? A joint meeting of the Council and the Commission is scheduled for January; do all present have equal fundamental rights?
  15. Ed, Gary & Steve: Thank you very much for your replys. No; committees do not make their own rules of procedure. RTW
×
×
  • Create New...