Default Order of Business for Greater than Quarterly Meetings?

[jstackpo]

P. 353 (11th ed., of course), lines 20-23, appear to be clear (to me anyway) in asserting that if an association "usually" meets at a greater than quarterly interval, the "standard" Order of Business (same page and following, as well as p. 26) does not apply and, p. 372, suggests that the association should "customarily" adopt an "agenda or program" for its meetings each time they meet. (I assume that the association has not adopted some Order of Business in bylaws or the like.)

But suppose it chooses not to (or neglects to do so). What then?

I don't see that there is any default order of business specified in the book for them to fall back on. This seems to be a bit of a lacuna.

[alanh49]

P. 353 (11th ed., of course), lines 20-23, appear to be clear (to me anyway) in asserting that if an association "usually" meets at a greater than quarterly interval, the "standard" Order of Business (same page and following, as well as p. 26) does not apply and, p. 372, suggests that the association should "customarily" adopt an "agenda or program" for its meetings each time they meet. (I assume that the association has not adopted some Order of Business in bylaws or the like.)

But suppose it chooses not to (or neglects to do so). What then?

I don't see that there is any default order of business specified in the book for them to fall back on. This seems to be a bit of a lacuna.

IMO the default order of business of any such organization would be the same with the following changes:

Delete # 4) and # 5)

[jstackpo]

I agree that the "standard" OoB (less what isn't relevant) is a good default, but I am looking for something to point to in the book to enforce the sequence in an "infrequent meeting" - to show someone who says "Show Me!", just like we tell other people to do when they claim a (screwy) rule "is in the book somewhere".

[Dan Honemann]

I agree that the "standard" OoB (less what isn't relevant) is a good default, but I am looking for something to point to in the book to enforce the sequence in an "infrequent meeting" - to show someone who says "Show Me!", just like we tell other people to do when they claim a (screwy) rule "is in the book somewhere".

Perhaps the "default" rule is the one found on page 25, lines 24-29.

[Shmuel Gerber]

Perhaps the "default" rule is the one found on page 25, lines 24-29.

But there are still the rules on page 367, lines 4-16, and the general rule that if minutes of a previous meeting have not been approved, they are approved at or near the opening of the meeting. Therefore, if the meeting happens to be one that is held within a quarterly time interval of the previous one, there may be unfinished business, general order, and special orders due to be taken up at the present meeting. So, before getting to new business, the are still rules that specify that the following should be taken up:

a ) reading and approval of the minutes,

b ) special orders,

c ) unfinished business, and

d ) general orders.

Under RONR, there is an order of business even when there is no order of business.

[Dan Honemann]

But there are still the rules on page 367, lines 4-16, and the general rule that if minutes of a previous meeting have not been approved, they are approved at or near the opening of the meeting. Therefore, if the meeting happens to be one that is held within a quarterly time interval of the previous one, there may be unfinished business, general order, and special orders due to be taken up at the present meeting. So, before getting to new business, the are still rules that specify that the following should be taken up:

a ) reading and approval of the minutes,

b ) special orders,

c ) unfinished business, and

d ) general orders.

Under RONR, there is an order of business even when there is no order of business.

But the rules on page 367, lines 4-16, relate to cases in which the society has adopted its own order of business (which is lacking in some respects), not to one which, as posited, has none at all.

[Dan Honemann]

But the rules on page 367, lines 4-16, relate to cases in which the society has adopted its own order of business (which is lacking in some respects), not to one which, as posited, has none at all.

... although I suppose what you are suggesting is that, if the meeting happens to be one that is held within a quarterly time interval of the previous one and a question was (lets say) postponed to it from the previous meeting, an order of business has been adopted (at least to that extent).

[Shmuel Gerber]

But the rules on page 367, lines 4-16, relate to cases in which the society has adopted its own order of business (which is lacking in some respects), not to one which, as posited, has none at all.

... although I suppose what you are suggesting is that, if the meeting happens to be one that is held within a quarterly time interval of the previous one and a question was (lets say) postponed to it from the previous meeting, an order of business has been adopted (at least to that extent).

I don't know about that. The paragraph in question seems, at first glance, to be describing only the situations in which either the organization is subject to the standard order of business or it has adopted its own order of business. But, strictly speaking, wouldn't the condition of "Where an organization's order of business does not provide such headings ..." (which begins its own sentence) be fulfilled where there is no order of business at all?

Perhaps the heading of this paragraph should actually be "Relation of Orders of the Day to the Established Order of Business (If Any)".

I should probably scrounge around to see if there is some further evidence to support my original reply, which I actually think is quite sensible.

[George Mervosh]

I don't know about that. The paragraph in question seems, at first glance, to be describing only the situations in which either the organization is subject to the standard order of business or it has adopted its own order of business. But, strictly speaking, wouldn't the condition of "Where an organization's order of business does not provide such headings ..." (which begins its own sentence) be fulfilled where there is no order of business at all?

Perhaps the heading of this paragraph should actually be "Relation of Orders of the Day to the Established Order of Business (If Any)".

I should probably scrounge around to see if there is some further evidence to support my original reply, which I actually think is quite sensible.

Any luck? Cause it's still quite sensible