Adopting RONR

[Guest Gail]

Our Board has unofficially used RONR without the use of the recommended guidelines of RONR. The use of RONR is sporadic and used only when one is seeking to keep something out of the minutes of the corporation.

Other Board members are pushing that we follow the guidelines presented by RONR and formally adopt RONR.

Those wishing for more control and sporadic use, have decided that writing a Policy to Adopt RONR will be sufficient. I don't believe it is correct and that RONR is not meant to be used in such a manner. Am I correct?

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Our Board has unofficially used RONR without the use of the recommended guidelines of RONR.

This is important.

RONR is not the parliamentary authority.

So the parliamentary rules of order of RONR are not binding on the organization.

The organization therefore will run under the common parliamentary law.

Q. What do you mean by the phrase "recommended guidelines"?

That is not a phrase taken from RONR.

Q. Are you drawing a distinction between rules of order and standing rules?

The use of RONR is sporadic and used only when one is seeking to keep something out of the minutes of the corporation.

OK.

I suppose "Half a loaf is better than none."

Having a rule to go by is better than being at the mercy of the whims of the chair, and the captiousness of the members, (as Thomas Jefferson) said, when there is no regular rule in place.

Other Board members are pushing that we follow the guidelines presented by RONR and formally adopt RONR.

There are two ways of adopting RONR as the parliamentary authority:

1. by putting that adoption into the bylaws.

2. by adopted RONR via a special rule of order.

It sounds like you will be doing #2, if anything.

Those wishing for more control and sporadic use, have decided that writing a Policy to Adopt RONR will be sufficient.

I am dubious that your description ("... writing a policy to adopt RONR ...") matches my above description.

But it is close, if it is not correct.

I don't believe it is correct and that RONR is not meant to be used in such a manner.

Unclear.

Q. You don't believe WHAT is correct?

(a.) to use RONR unofficially without using its "guidelines"?

(b.) to use RONR sporadically, when it wasn't adopted as the parliamentary authority?

(c.) to adopt RONR via a written policy?

Am I correct?

No.

Organizations are free to vary from Robert's Rules of Order, if the organizations have not officially adopted Robert's Rules of Order.

They are free to draft their own special rules of order.

They are free to "suspend the rules" (one of the motions in RONR).

[Josh Martin]

Other Board members are pushing that we follow the guidelines presented by RONR and formally adopt RONR.

Those wishing for more control and sporadic use, have decided that writing a Policy to Adopt RONR will be sufficient. I don't believe it is correct and that RONR is not meant to be used in such a manner. Am I correct?

It is preferable to adopt RONR in the organization's Bylaws, but it may also be adopted by a Special Rule of Order. The former requires whatever your Bylaws require for amendment, and the latter requires a 2/3 vote with previous notice or a vote of a majority of the entire membership without notice. See How Your Organization Can Adopt Robert's Rules for more information. I would note that if this board is subordinate to a general membership, it is unlikely that it has the authority to take either of these actions.

I would also note that the method of adoption doesn't really change the amount of "control" available to the assembly. Regardless of how the parliamentary authority is adopted, many rules may be suspended by a 2/3 vote, many rules may be superseded by the adoption of special rules of order, and some rules may only be superseded by the Bylaws.