Mark Apodaca, PRP

I have a question for you while I am still in session. A delegate made a motion to suspend the bylaws. Failed to meet the 4/5 vote so therefore the motion failed. With that said, another motion to suspend the bylaws cannot be made because you cannot have the same motion during the same session. It does not matter who made the motion. It does not matter what the reason is. If the motion to suspend the bylaws passed then the delegate can make the motion (specific purpose). Correct me please.

Yesterday during the third session of the conference (today is the fourth and last session), the election was held. All positions had one candidate except for the vice presidency. The current vice president lost his bid to be reelected by a vote of 72 to 58. Majority was 66. The secretary cast the ballot recording the results in the minutes. The election closed in the afternoon. This morning I learned that a group want to bring back the election and hold the vice presidency election again. There was no illegal voting. There were 138 delegates present and 137 voted. There is no evidence of any illegality in the process. The results were not even close. If the results were close, a recount could have been asked for. Did not happen. Its over...

Right.. but unlike many cases, the delegates include some who are deaf-blind and they rely on interpreters. If the interpreters can only work till 6 PM, following the agenda and some delegates make a motion to extend the session to 8 PM, the interpreters cannot stay for whatever reason. This will violate the deaf-blind delegates to equal access, fairness, and the right to vote. In this case, the motion can be considered to be out of order. Your thoughts?

Breaks were on the agenda. Two, one hour breaks. Delegates voted to eliminate the breaks to have more time to debate the next several motions.

Because their motions failed in today's session, I believe they will try again tomorrow since it will be session IV, the last session. Cannot make a same motion twice during the same day. According to today's agenda, the business meeting was supposed to end at 8 PM EST. During the last hour, there was debate to amend the agenda to 10 PM. That failed then there was debate to start early and extend time in the afternoon. The debate went on and on until the delegates voted to stay with the current agenda without changes. There were no breaks. The sign language interpreters did not have a break. The deaf-blind delegates as well as the staff, board and myself had no break. The meeting went on for 4 hours without any breaks.

Also, the organization's bylaws say under Suspensions: These bylaws may be suspended for a specific purpose by 4/5 vote of the delegates present and voting. Two delegates tried to suspend the bylaws three times (1 delegate once and another delegate twice). The motions failed all three times. They wanted to add an Article and section regarding to elections. They did not want to make a proposed amendment to the bylaws because they did not want to wait till the next biennial conference. That article/section about suspensions needs to be removed from the bylaws.

Yes, in Zoom, next to all the squares there is an area in the right where people use it for chat. That is where you would see the PO and RFI during the process. The President explained that during the voting process there shall be no interruptions per the parliamentarian. Some of the delegates just continued with it. A lot of parliamentary training is needed. I gave three workshops and I recognized their names during the business meeting. They were great. I gave training to three states. Forty-seven more states to go. A challenge.

Atul, There were no interruptions during voting so all was well. We received too many RFI or PO during the debate times. Mark

That is one of the disadvantages when it comes to virtual conferences. If you used Zoom, you will see a number of boxes and on the right side you will see chat. You will see a number of PO or RFI and when they show up on the screen, they are clearly not points of order or request for information. I hope in the future there will be procedures developed with addressing virtual conferences, but I hope there will never be another one. COVID-19 has changed many things but, I prefer physical conferences. Mark

Joshua, Point of order was what time is break. There is an agenda. I wish the organization gave me an opportunity to give a workshop about parliamentary procedure. Most do not know or understand parliamentary law and procedures. Mark

Prior to voting for each position, the candidates met all the requirements. All the delegates were present and are members of the organization, so those rules were met. Request for Information, all information about the voting process, the candidates, the voting delegates was available in the delegates manual and website. This has been a very challenging process because this conference is through virtual (Zoom). I did find one which would have been considered Point of Order where during the voting process, one candidate left the room and the other remained in the room and voted. The rule was both to leave the room. I told the nominating committee chair that the rule was broken and the voting process had to start over. One more day... Mark

During the election process, while delegates were voting, some of the delegates raised a point of order and request for information. For the Office of the President, there was only one candidate. For the Office of the Vice President, there were two. It is a simple process and just need to vote. I see no validity for a PO or RFI. I believe it was very impropriate. Your thoughts?

Of course, if it has been acted upon, it cannot be amended. If it has not been acted on, it can be amended. Mark

Regarding the same topic, in 2018 there was a resolution to name the month of April "Deaf History Month". It passed during the 2018 conference. Now, for 2020, a different resolution is on the table to rename March 15 to April 15 "Deaf History Month". As we know, a resolution is a motion. The 2020 resolution is out of order. If they want to change the date, they should use ASPA. ASPA has no time limits. Can be used any time no matter how far back. Mark

Thank you sir...

I did check RONR 12th edition before JJ's response. I was in the middle of the second day of a virtual conference (two more days to go) and ASPA was brought up. I gave the correct information but after seeing the script card, I began to wonder whether ASPA has a similar process as Previous Question. You need to pass Previous Question before you vote on the Main Motion. Because of the script card, which stated no debate and cannot be amended, I began to wonder if I needed to pass ASPA first before going into debating the motion which was previously adopted. Mark

I have Motion Script Cards and the popular Parliamentary Motions - Quick Reference card. I found them to be different. This has to do with the topic above and here are the differences: Script Card Cannot interrupt the speaker Not debatable 2/3 without prior notice Not amendable Reconsiderable Quick Reference Card Cannot interrupt the speaker Requires a second Debatable 2/3 without prior notice Amendable ------------------------------- How I see it Delegate makes a motion to amend the agenda which passed yesterday. Seconded Opened for debate Can Amend (becomes a primary amendment) Vote - 2/3 required to pass Am I correct with the process?

Josh, Exactly. why complicate things when it can be simple. Mark

Gary, I am in concur that the Section needs to be rewritten for clarity. As a matter of fact, I feel that the entire bylaws need to be revised. I served on the board for the first time back in 1996 and the bylaws are pretty much the same as of today. There have been amendments to the bylaws during each of the biennial conferences since then. The NAD bylaws are only 10 pages and a number things are not covered which means that the Parliamentarian has to refer to RONR. During the past several biennial conferences, the parliamentarians were not a part of serving as advisors to the bylaws committee. I like NAP’s bylaws which is 21 pages and more detailed. When I read Sections 4.2 (Elected Officers) and 4.3 (Elected Regional Board Members), both sections made it a requirement that to hold office, three things must be met. First, you must be a member of NAD. Secondly, you must be a member of a state association or nonprofit organization affiliate. And lastly, you must be a member of NAD for two or more years. Now for Section 4.5, because the conference starts tomorrow afternoon, the only alternative available is for someone to be nominated from the floor. And, unlike the previous sentences under 4.5, requirement of candidacy documents are not stated. So as long as the candidate meets the three requirements above, he or she is qualified to run for office. Mark

Rob, In other words, you agree that "elected pending documentation" is valid?

Section 4.5. Candidacy Requirements. The Election Committee shall receive completed candidacy forms, requisite background information, and proof of membership of a State Association and/or member-based Organizational Affiliate from prospective candidates for Officer and Regional Board Member positions no later than thirty (30) days prior to the biennial national conference to verify candidacy requirements. Names of official candidates shall be posted prior to the conference. If there are no prospects for a particular position, the Election Committee shall receive candidacy documents prior to the start of the Council of Representatives meeting. There shall be no nominations from the floor except in cases where there are not more than one (1) candidate running for the Elected Offices at the time of deadline in which nominations from the floor shall then be accepted. This was previously discussed. This relates to the National Association of the Deaf. On Thursday, the first of four virtual Council of Representatives session will start. So far there are only one candidate for each of the positions (Officers and Four Regional Board Members). The Chair of the Elections Committee called me and informed me that there were rumors that one individual plans to challenge another current candidate for a regional member seat. Section 4.5 appears to put in restrictions as follows: The person who may run cannot submit his documents because of the sentence in red above. There is one candidate already running. If he is nominated by the floor, and won the election, it defeats the purpose of submitting the documents. My question is - if the individual wins, can it be announced that the person is elected pending on candidacy requirements and documents? If he did not meet the requirements, then the other individual wins the position. I don't believe that a new elected officer or rep should serve on the board if the requirements are not met. The Chair of the Nominating Committee asked if nominations can be accepted anytime during the four sessions. I told him no because according to the schedule, the Election of Officers and Regional Representatives happens at the beginning of Session III and that is when he can accept nominations from the floor. Mark

Perhaps I was not clear. Lets say that a special rule of order was adopted by the assembly. The special rule states that when it comes to debate, up to three members who support the motion and three who oppose the motion will be allowed to speak at two minutes each. Now, lets say a motion was made to purchase a blue colored 2021 Mustang. The member who made the motion was the first to speak, then one who opposed the motion. After the second member who supports the motion finished speaking, another member make an amendment to change the color from blue to red. The amendment passed. Now, my question is for the new amended motion (1) does debate start all over with up to three support and three who oppose or (2) pick up where the debate was left off beginning with the second member who opposed the motion speaking then one remaining support and lastly, one remaining opposition?

There is a standing rule saying during debate only six members may debate, three in support of the motion and three oppose, and each will have two minutes. Suppose that at the end of the second member who supported the motion, someone makes an amendment to the motion. If the amendment passes, debate resumes with the new motion (with amendment). Do they pick up where they left off before the amendment was made or do they go back to 3 aye/3 oppose?

Going back to this topic, after reading the section several times and reading what you shared, here are my thoughts: The Louisiana Association of the Deaf's bylaws do not have a section covering special meetings of the board. So with that said, they cannot have special meetings according to RONR. Before a board member can make a motion via text, he needs to receive the board's "written" consent via text. If all board members agree, the board member will make a motion, no second since board is made up of seven members, debate, and vote. Again, when it comes to "written" consent, If one board member does not agree then the motion cannot be made. Same with a member abstaining. If the motion passes, it will be ratified during the next regular board meeting. Any thoughts? There needs to be a system and procedures to make this effective. I do know one organization has its members emailing, texting, and making a video simultaneously. Mark

Yes, where I work, we still use fax. Some use fax software for their computers and send faxes instead of the fax machine.