Modyfied Agenda

[Guest Ken]

We adopt the President's proposed Agenda after approving the Minutes. The Agenda was adopted. Half way through the meeting a Board member received the Chair's recognition and moved to add an Agenda item. The request was seconded and approved. The Chair added the new Agenda item to the bottom of the New Business list. The moving Board member protested, demanding the new Agenda item be heard sooner. The Chair did not recognize the moving Board member and ruled him out of order.

Our meetings are time sensitive via By-Law, so the time expired and the new Agenda item was not heard.

We can not find the appropriate parlimentary procedure in RRO.

Will you help, please?

Ken

[hmtcastle]

The moving Board member protested, demanding the new Agenda item be heard sooner. The Chair did not recognize the moving Board member and ruled him out of order.

Sounds about right to me. Serves the "demanding" member right for making such a demand. If he wanted the item to be placed at the top of the agenda he should have said so, instead of whining after the fact.

See also FAQ #14.

By the way, even though your meetings are "time sensitive via By-Law", it's quite possible that you can suspend that particular rule.

[Rev Ed]

My comments are as follows:

1) If the member wanted an item added to the Agenda, why did the member not ask for this item to be included in the Agenda at the beginning of the meeting.

2) When the member did move to add the item to the Agenda, why did he/she not specifically request that the item be added at a specific point? The member cannot complain afterwards as the President is not a mind reader. As for ruling the member out of order, if the President felt that the member was acting dilatory, then the President could rule the member out of order - especially as the member had the chance to make his/her point when the motion was made.

3) Why could the item not simply be brought up during "New Business"?

4) I agree with the suspension of the By-law if required.

5) Also, the Agenda should be approved prior to approval of the Minutes.

[Tim Wynn]

We adopt the President's proposed Agenda after approving the Minutes. The Agenda was adopted. Half way through the meeting a Board member received the Chair's recognition and moved to add an Agenda item. The request was seconded and approved. The Chair added the new Agenda item to the bottom of the New Business list. The moving Board member protested, demanding the new Agenda item be heard sooner. The Chair did not recognize the moving Board member and ruled him out of order.

Our meetings are time sensitive via By-Law, so the time expired and the new Agenda item was not heard.

We can not find the appropriate parlimentary procedure in RRO.

Will you help, please?

Ken

See RONR(10th ed.), p. 207, l. 17 - p. 208, l. 1; p. 351, l. 31 - p. 353, l. 2.

[Josh Martin]

Will you help, please?

The item should be taken up under Unfinished Business at the next regular meeting. For future reference, the member should either move to Amend the previously adopted agenda (2/3 vote or a vote of a majority of the entire membership) or to Suspend the Rules to take up his item before the appointed time (2/3 vote). A single member does not have the authority to demand that an item of business be heard sooner.

Your assembly also seems to misunderstand the purpose of New Business. This heading is intended for items which are raised during the meeting, which have not previously been placed on the agenda or otherwise made an order of the day. Items added to the agenda should be placed under Special Orders (if the assembly wishes to assign a specific time to the item or give it precedence over other items) or General Orders (for other items of business).

3) Why could the item not simply be brought up during "New Business"?

Because they ran out of time.

[Rev Ed]

Because they ran out of time.

Because the issue was placed at "the end of the list for New Business", if they moved the motion when New Business started, it might have been dealt with.

[George Mervosh]

Our meetings are time sensitive via By-Law.

What does that mean?

[hmtcastle]

What does that mean?

My guess (while Ken's either deciphering the CAPTCHA code or having a life) is that the bylaws say something like "Monthly meetings shall be held on the third Thursday from 8:00 PM until 9:00 PM".

I suggested (hopefully correctly) that this might be a suspendable rule, I'm not a fan of suspending anything in the bylaws but I think I could live with suspending this one (or, better yet, not putting it in the bylaws in the first place).

[Josh Martin]

Because the issue was placed at "the end of the list for New Business", if they moved the motion when New Business started, it might have been dealt with.

Well, it seems to me that if there is a list, the assembly is likely confusing New Business with General Orders.

My guess (while Ken's either deciphering the CAPTCHA code or having a life) is that the bylaws say something like "Monthly meetings shall be held on the third Thursday from 8:00 PM until 9:00 PM".

I suggested (hopefully correctly) that this might be a suspendable rule, I'm not a fan of suspending anything in the bylaws but I think I could live with suspending this one (or, better yet, not putting it in the bylaws in the first place).

It's hard to say for sure with such little information from the original poster, but I agree that a rule of the type you describe is likely to be in the nature of a rule of order.