When/how can one change the format of a meeting?

[beis19]

I'm brand new to the this site, and need help in running a new 12 step meeting that I am the co-chair of. The meeting is literally one week old (in an established 12 step program) and attendees are already requesting a change of format. More specifically, they want to change the length of the meeting from 60 minutes to 90 minutes.

We put a lot of work into getting this meeting going, and sought a lot of counsel to make sure we were keeping with the Traditions of our program, in the desire to serve the greater good. Two of the primary factors in creating a one hour meeting was the limited timed that we co-chairs have to chair it (hence the co-chairing), and the fact that some people travel 3 hours roundtrip to make it.

When, if at all, is it appropriate to put to vote the length of the meeting, or any other changes to format for that matter?

I'm admittedly peeved, but I respect the need to follow the rules.

Thanks,

M

[Guest Edgar]

The meeting is literally one week old (in an established 12 step program) and attendees are already requesting a change of format.

Well, if you change "meeting" to "organization" and "attendees" to "members", we might be able to help.

Is there an organization? Do you have members? Bylaws?

Or is this just a casual gathering where anyone who shows up can speak and vote?

[sMargaret]

Does your organization have bylaws, and do the bylaws state that you follow Robert's Rules of Order?

[Guest beis19]

Thanks for the clarifying questions.

Yes, ours qualifies as an "organization", we specifically use the term "members" in reference to those who attend, and though there is a nod to our "bylaws" I couldn't tell you what they are. We are clear however that our organization is to be run in accordance with Roberts Rules. Trouble is, we don't know what they are, so I came to get educated.

[Chris Harrison]

Was there an actual rule adopted (by the members) limiting the meetings to 60 minutes? If there is then the meeting is limited to 60 minutes unless the rule is changed or the assembly by a 2/3 vote decides to continue the meeting (RONR pp. 219-224). If there is no rule in place then the meeting would continue until the assembly decides to Adjourn (by a majority vote), the assembly adopts a motion to Adjourn at a specific time (would only apply for that specific meeting), or the order of business has been completed.

[Guest Edgar]

. . . though there is a nod to our "bylaws" I couldn't tell you what they are.

Well, your next step should be to get a copy of your bylaws because they will supersede ("overrule") RONR wherever there is a conflict. You would also need to review the minutes of (all) past meetings in order to see, as Chris H. asks, how the 60-minute meeting length was initially determined. But perhaps there are no minutes? Since this is a 12-step program, your meetings may not actually be meetings (i.e. "business meetings") in the parliamentary sense. Do you for example, make (and second) motions, debate the motion, and then vote on it? It may well be that your gatherings operate on something like a consensus format where everyone (or most everyone) discusses and issue informally and comes to some sort of agreement (like extending the meeting by a half hour). Or those who want to stay longer can simply do so. You might lose a quorum but perhaps that's not a factor.

I realize I may be making some assumptions based on this being a 12-step group so feel free to correct any misconceptions.

[Gary c Tesser]

Coming late to this party, I'd advise Original Poster beis19, and also Guest_beis19 who I'll guess is a relative, that we regular posters on this forum customarily wince at encountering the term and concept "co-chairs".

Also, being a new co-chair, Original Poster beis19 should summarily, or immediately -- whichever is sooner -- get a copy of RONR - In Brief, and read it at once, not tomorrow, and thereby be leagues ahead (and also Guest_beis19 should get one, unless they can conveniently share a copy).

Finally, this may be just me, but are you sure your members [i[prefer to travel three hours each way, to barely stay at their destination for 1/6 of the travel time?? For all that travelling, I myself would be less inclined to bother for that one piddling hour.

[David A Foulkes]

Finally, this may be just me, but are you sure your members [i[prefer to travel three hours each way, to barely stay at their destination for 1/6 of the travel time?? For all that travelling, I myself would be less inclined to bother for that one piddling hour.

Well, beis19 said they travel 3 hours round trip, if that would help make your inclination less steep, as the meeting would now be 1/2 the travel time if the format change is approved. <a winky face inserted here>