Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'debate'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • RONR Message Board – Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised
    • General Discussion
    • Advanced Discussion
    • The Robert’s Rules Website
  • About the Message Board
    • Questions or Comments about the Message Board
  • Archive
    • Archived Discussions (2010)

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Location:


Interests

  1. Can discussion/debate transpire on an item being introduced for a public hearing? Our elected body considered an item captioned, “Consider the introduction of an ordinance to change the organizational structure of various departments and calling a public hearing on ‘date’.” The body was informed that it could not discuss or debate the particulars of the agenda item because the caption did not include the words “and discuss”. Does the item require that the public hearing is called before discussing the matter? If so, does this preclude the body from making changes to the proposed ordinance befo
  2. It is the long-standing tradition in the conventions of an organization of which I am a member to not allow someone who speaking to a main motion a make a motion at the end of a speech during debate (such as a motion to amend or previous question). Our president asked me if I could find the rule on that, and I couldn't. My guess was that when you are recognized you can debate or make a motion but not both. I couldn't find anything that gave a clear answer. So, is our rule something that's in Robert's Rules or is it just a long standing custom of our organization?
  3. A motion to fix the time to which to adjourn is made when in the course of business it appears that there will not be an opportunity to introduce it as an incidental main motion. Later in the same meeting, business is completed earlier than anticipated and the motion to fix the time to which to adjourn is moved to be reconsidered. The question is can it be debated? Page 324 states: EFFECT OF ADOPTION OF THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER; RULES GOVERNING DEBATE ON THE RECONSIDERATION. The effect of the adoption of the motion to Reconsider is immediately to place before the assembly again the questi
  4. Can non voting members participate in a debate for a proposed By-Law change?
  5. Suppose that an assembly conducts a ballot vote for an election and no one is elected after the first round of balloting because no candidate receives a majority vote. Is debate automatically reopened?If not, is a motion to reopen debate in order? What vote is required?
  6. This is a question on whether a debate is called for. Organization of 1000 (hereafter Assembly) is looking to fill position of president. The elected officers (10 members of organization, selected by Assembly). Officers solicit nominations for Assembly Members to be on a committee to recommend the next President. A list of 10 members are selected by the Officers, who refer to this as the Nominating Slate. The Nominating Slate is put before the Assembly to be voted on for approval and an Assembly meeting. A Motion (in my opinion) is presented to the Moderator, who calls for a
  7. After reading this thread, I have a question: Why is the motion, relating to entering or leaving Executive Session, debatable? I can sort of understand in a general sense why the motion to enter into Executive Session is debatable, within reason. For example, one member may think an issue is of a sensitive or controversial nature, while another member may not. But the motion to come out of Executive Session seems far more simple - either you want to end Executive Session or not. I know I am missing something here, but I don't know what it is so I am asking.
  8. Is there ordinarily debate after nominations are closed? Or does an election immediately follow the closing of nominations without debate? Our bylaws provide that we follow Robert's Rules when not inconsistent with the bylaws. For a particular election, the bylaws provide that candidates must submit their names in advance of the meeting (no nominations are allowed from the floor), and that each candidate is entitled to address the assembly for a specified period of time. The bylaws provide that the election is conducted by written ballot. However, the bylaws do not specify whether deb
  9. On page 381 line 35 -382 line 10 it is explained that a member can be entitled recognition over a member seeking to make a main motion if he or she states their intention. How would one phrase this? Would they simply a) rise and ask for recognition and then raise a point of order if not recognized, b ) prefix their attempt at recognition with (I rise) or c) State their intention as they rise and ask for recognition or d) another course of action?
  10. Is it possible for an organization to alter Robert's Rules? Specifically, I am referring to the rule regarding the length or number of speeches in a debate. Can provision be made to allow for a member to speak more than twice on a particular question on the same day? (Section 4, page 43, line 5)
  11. Two questions: 1. If an ADOPTED agenda includes a generic topic under New Business like "Lobby Decorating," can multiple motions germane to "Lobby Decorating" be offered under that agenda item before the body proceeds to the next item of business (say, "Landscaping")? For example, let's say a motion concerning wallpaper is made and disposed of under Lobby Decorating, can a member then rise following that vote and make a motion concerning carpeting? Or, are no further motions in order beyond that first motion because the next item of business (Landscaping) is up next? 2. I serve o
  12. Dear colleagues, When a member of a body demands that something be put "on the record," I have always assumed that this request lies within the power of the assembly to grant or deny. In other words, the members must vote on whether the statement should be included in the minutes or not. However, I can't find any citation for this in RONR. A difficult board member, prone to making such statements, is asking "where it says that?" Can anyone point me in the right direction, either to specific guidance on this point, or to general guidance about the rights of members and the rights of the
  13. I recently came across the following test question 25. The subsidiary motion for the Previous Question can be applied to an undebatable motion if a member wanted to a. stop an amendment.b. not allow members to ask questions.c. delete a question asked by a member that is recorded in the minutes of the previous meeting.d. make a motion to allow the assembly to debate it. The correct answer was marked C. Is that really correct? I remember reading in RONR that the previous question can be applied to fix time to which to ajourn to prevent the making of the motion and I can't even remember reading
  14. If you are apart of a organization that is has an annual meeting to discuss proposals to amend their bylaws/constitution, is there a proper order in which the discussion is conducted? Such as, if there are only 3 people who are allowed to speak "For" a proposal and 3 people allowed to speak "Against" a proposal, does it matter in what order these people speak? For example, 1 person for, followed by 1 person against, followed by 1 for, followed by 1 against, followed by 1 for, followed by 1 against? As opposed to all 3 that are for a proposal speaking 3 times in a row followed by all 3 that
  15. Guest

    Limiting Discussion

    A topic for upcoming discussion is very controversial and divisive. Unfortunately, a prolonged discussion of this one topic will throw off the entire agenda. Still the issue is of such importance that not allowing everyone a chance to be heard will increase the divisiveness. The speaker of the House is initiating the limiting of discussion. The amount of time to be allowed and the number of people that will be allowed to speak is just a small fraction of what would normally be expected to respond to this issue. The Speakers decision is based on RRONR 11th Edition 43. Rules of Governing D
  16. Our standing committee consists of 5 members. It's task is to plan two annual competitions for the organization. It meets on a set schedule. Most of the meeting is spent on details such as selecting judges, prizes, venue, and making any changes to the program content. We do use an agenda and follow RONR. We have a budget and submit an information report to the organization. Occasionally, we need approval for major changes and submit a recommendation for action. From my POV, the committee functions well and within RONR parameters. My understanding of committee meetings, such as this, is that
  17. Following up on discussion thread of OP Rev Ed, http://robertsrules.forumflash.com/index.php?/topic/21593-interruption-to-debate-time/ I was going to follow up on Mr Honemann's post #6, which says that RONR says what Nancy N., in post #5, expresses as her preference, that the timekeeper should stop the clock (arguably on direction of the chair, or his own spunky initiative). Since I myself don't see where the rules say so, though I'm glad to learn that they do, I was going to then ask where the book says so, or which lines to read between. To my regret, the irrepressably irrepressable OP, T
  18. I have a question per page 295 ll. 11-12 ('If the speaker consents to the interruption, the time consumed will be taken out of his allowed time.') Why is it that if the speaker consents that it is taken out of his time? This seems to all the potential for abuse. For example, if I wanted to ask another member a question, I would likely try to be as brief as possible, However, if someone did not get along with the member then he/she could take as long as possible to ask the question in order to limit the other member's speaking time. To me, it seems more fair and practical to not take th
  19. Guest

    Debate Questions

    Our organization is facing what is going to be a very volatile meeting: our president and two of her friends appointed themselves the bylaws committee and have written an entirely new set of bylaws that they wish our club to adopt. The Board of Directors voted unanimously to not accept these new bylaws (the president did not vote), but according to our current bylaws, all bylaws revisions must go before the general membership for a vote. The motion to accept any bylaws changes must pass by a 2/3 vote. Here is the problem, at our board meeting last night, the president announced that she wi
  20. My organization is about to have elections. How to we determine who speaks first between a challenger and an incumbent?
  21. The town I live in states that they adhere to Robert's rules. The city attorney told me to consult Robert's Rules of Order. The procedure for a citizen(me) to speak before the Mayor and council is to request to be on the agenda at least 72 hrs before any regular scheduled mayor/council meeting and give a 1 sentence description of the topic. My topic being that the local municipal judge appointed by the local mayor is being investigated by the State Attorney General's office as evidenced by a press release from the attorney general's website stating such. I gave such description , and was l
  22. I know that nominations can be debated, but I need to know if that also means that members can ask direct questions of the candidates during the debate.
  23. How would you explain the difference between rescind and reconisder? With a general understanding, how would you debate on each? I don't see the difference in the way you would debate reconsider/rescind, particularly in an FFA demo. Is it debated the same way? An example would be awesome, but any clarification is appreciated. Thanks!
  24. How would you explain the difference between rescind and reconisder? With a general understanding, how would you debate on each? I don't see the difference in the way you would debate rescind or reconisder, especially in an FFA demonstration. Any clarification is appreciated. Thanks!
  25. Guest

    Elections and Debate

    In the election of officers, is the assembly entitled to debate in the same way as in a main motion. In other words, isn't an election the question of who shall we elect as president or secretary or whatever office? (A citation to Robert's Rules would be helpful.) So, the converse, if an election isn't a question before the assembly, how is the issue of discussion fairly handled? The issue revolves around rule-making to limit the time and the people who may speak for candidates. If an overall time-limit for a candidate is set at, say, 10 minutes and only that candidate can choose who speaks (w
×
×
  • Create New...