Chair "Yields the Floor," but not discussion/meeting

[Guest Kelly]

Please be advised this inquiry is being posted by a new board President who is trying to get up to speed on Robert's Rules but has not mastered them yet. This question may seem pretty basic, but I appreciate any suggestions. At a recent BOD meeting, the BOD was drafting its answers to questions posed by a CPA related to an audit inquiry. The chair yielded the floor to the Treasurer to conduct this Q&A session, however, a former member of the board spoke out and made an allegation of fraud against a current board member. The ensuing 90-minute discussion completely derailed the meeting's agenda. No one was shouting or behaving badly per se -- everything was very civil (but there are concerted efforts by a minority of homeowners to outright derail and otherwise passive-aggressively disrupt meetings, like an old-fashioned sit-in). Things have been handled rather informally up to now, and in a positive sense have made the board appear more approachable and less autocratic. Robert's Rules have not been employed consistently or effectively in the past 3 years by previous administrations. But in this case, consuming 90 minutes of a 2 hour meeting clearly overstepped protocol boundaries and I need some good advice about how to reclaim the floor and maintain order in the future. Appreciate any suggestions using Robert's Rules, limiting the duration of the discussion, limiting the community member's time to speak, regaining the floor appropriately employing Rules, etc. Thanks very much.

[George Mervosh]

While the fine people here will offer tons of good tips and solicit more information from you, I can see this thread going to 40 posts, and everyone being confused.

Perhaps a lil hands on training will help:

Contact either (or both) the ...

National Association of Parliamentarians

213 South Main St.

Independence, MO 64050-3850

Phone: 888-627-2929

Fax: 816-833-3893;

e-mail: hq@NAP2.org

<<www.parliamentarians.org>>

or

American Institute of Parliamentarians

550M Ritchie Highway #271

Severna Park, MD 21146

Phone: 888-664-0428

Fax: 410-544-4640

e-mail: aip@parliamentaryprocedure.org

<<www.parliamentaryprocedure.org>>

for a reference or information.

There are also individuals out there that are truly expert parliamentarians, but not members of either group. I don't know of a list or ranking of them.

[Tim Wynn]

I concur with George.

(Also, I plan to be confused by this thread a little later.)

[Gary c Tesser]

Please be advised this inquiry is being posted by a new board President who is trying to get up to speed on Robert's Rules but has not mastered them yet. This question may seem pretty basic, but I appreciate any suggestions. At a recent BOD meeting, the BOD was drafting its answers to questions posed by a CPA related to an audit inquiry. The chair yielded the floor to the Treasurer to conduct this Q&A session, however, a former member of the board spoke out and made an allegation of fraud against a current board member. The ensuing 90-minute discussion completely derailed the meeting's agenda. No one was shouting or behaving badly per se -- everything was very civil (but there are concerted efforts by a minority of homeowners to outright derail and otherwise passive-aggressively disrupt meetings, like an old-fashioned sit-in). Things have been handled rather informally up to now, and in a positive sense have made the board appear more approachable and less autocratic. Robert's Rules have not been employed consistently or effectively in the past 3 years by previous administrations. But in this case, consuming 90 minutes of a 2 hour meeting clearly overstepped protocol boundaries and I need some good advice about how to reclaim the floor and maintain order in the future. Appreciate any suggestions using Robert's Rules, limiting the duration of the discussion, limiting the community member's time to speak, regaining the floor appropriately employing Rules, etc. Thanks very much.

I'll start by suggesting that you get your copy of RONR - In Brief, and read it at once. Without delay. Right there in the bookstore, and don't sit down until you have finished that (first!!) reading.

Now let's see. I don't think there's any legitimate turning the meeting over to the treasurer, in the first place, so there's no official way to reclaim the chair. But, especially since the assembly was well-behaved (lucky you, Kelly), it might have been as simple as stepping in and reasserting your duty to preside.

It looks to me as if you were pretty much blindsided by the abrupt allegation of fraud. I suppose you could have gently but firmly reminded the people that the subject under discussion was dealing with the audit, and that debate must be germane to the subject (in other words, not about an accusation of fraud). And yes, an assembly can set various limits for debate, and, especially, at a board meeting, for non-members of the board.

(Have you finished your first reading of RONR-IB yet?)

[Tim Wynn]

It looks to me as if you were pretty much blindsided by the abrupt allegation of fraud. I suppose you could have gently but firmly reminded the people that the subject under discussion was dealing with the audit, and that debate must be germane to the subject (in other words, not about an accusation of fraud).

Also, you could less gently and more firmly advise the member that an allegation (or even an implication) of fraud against a member is strictly out of order and not to be tolerated in a meeting. See RONR(10th ed.), p. 380, l. 1-14, especially l. 11-14 (after you've completed Mr. c Tesser's reading assignment).

[Josh Martin]

Appreciate any suggestions using Robert's Rules, limiting the duration of the discussion, limiting the community member's time to speak, regaining the floor appropriately employing Rules, etc.

That's quite a host of topics. I think you have some reading to do.

For limiting discussion, see RONR, 10th ed., pgs. 183-201 for a discussion of Limit or Extend Limits of Debate and the Previous Question (although such motions should generally not be entertained in small boards). There are also some default limits for debate. In larger assemblies, it's twice per member per motion per day, for up to ten minutes each time. In small boards (about 12 members or fewer), members may speak an unlimited number of times for up to ten minutes each time. See RONR, 10th ed., pgs. 375-379 and pgs. 470-471 for more information.

For limiting the community member's time to speak, keep in mind that so far as RONR is concerned, non-board members have no right to speak at all at a board meeting. So when the board adopts a motion (often by unanimous consent) allowing the individual to speak, the board may also specify a time limit. (RONR, 10th ed., pg. 255, footnote)

For regaining the floor... this situation isn't really addressed in RONR. Just be polite but firm, I guess.