Guest Guest Posted December 17, 2012 at 09:32 PM Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 at 09:32 PM Hello, I am wondering if someone can give me a definitive answer to my question. I am currently serving as the appointed Parliamentarian of a mutual benefit Corporation. I have recently been elected to the office of Secretary of the same group, with my term to commence on February 1, 2013. Our Bylaws are silent regarding Parliamentarians, other than a typical Article X, RONR controls. Does the Chair need to appoint a new Parliamentarian, or may I serve in both capacities? Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted December 17, 2012 at 09:36 PM Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 at 09:36 PM Nothing in RONR would prevent you from serving as both parliamentarian and Secretary. However, check the bylaws to make sure there are no limitations on how many offices/positions a person can hold at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted December 17, 2012 at 09:39 PM Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 at 09:39 PM Does the Chair need to appoint a new Parliamentarian, or may I serve in both capacities? Nothing in RONR prohibits a person from holding more than one office though some combinations (e.g. president and vice-president) are clearly problematic. The combination of secretary and parliamentarian doesn't raise any immediate red flags in my mind but stay tuned. And, as always, other rules or laws (e.g. corporation law) may apply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted December 17, 2012 at 11:26 PM Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 at 11:26 PM We may have covered this previously, but I can't recall if so and what the outcome may have been. As noted on p. 467, if the parliamentarian is a member of the assembly, he has the same duty to present a position of impartiality as the chair, and therefore does not make motions, speak in debate, nor vote except if the vote is by ballot.Being as Guest_Guest (why oh why can this forum not disallow "guest" as a user name?) would also be the secretary, he clearly would not get two votes. But would he at least get one, as secretary then? And could he make motions and speak in debate, as the secretary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted December 17, 2012 at 11:57 PM Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 at 11:57 PM But would he at least get one, as secretary then? And could he make motions and speak in debate, as the secretary?Even if he was only the Parliamentarian he'd have one vote and could make motions and speak in debate. But by accepting the office of Parliamentarian he agrees not to exercise those rights in most instances. Putting on the secretary's hat doesn't change that agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted December 18, 2012 at 12:00 AM Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 at 12:00 AM Even if he was only the Parliamentarian he'd have one vote and could make motions and speak in debate. But by accepting the office of Parliamentarian he agrees not to exercise those rights in most instances. Putting on the secretary's hat doesn't change that agreement.In what instances could he, as only parliamentarian, exercise these rights? And if you can toss me a citation, I'd appreciate it. I'm focusing on p. 467, which seems to speak to this otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted December 18, 2012 at 12:04 AM Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 at 12:04 AM In what instances could he, as only parliamentarian, exercise these rights?I believe he's free to vote when the vote is by ballot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted December 18, 2012 at 12:05 AM Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 at 12:05 AM I believe he's free to vote when the vote is by ballot.As I noted. <there's a smiley face here, Ed. May I call you Ed?> What about making motions and debating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted December 18, 2012 at 12:35 AM Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 at 12:35 AM What about making motions and debating?Well of course he shouldn't make motions or participate in debate. He's the Parliamentarian. I thought that was understood. But I confess I may have skimmed over the first part of your first reply and went straight to your two questions (i.e. what he could do "as secretary"). So I think we're on the same page. Unless you think that, by putting on the Secretary hat, he is somehow freed from the burden of wearing the Parliamentarian hat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted December 18, 2012 at 12:44 AM Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 at 12:44 AM Unless you think that, by putting on the Secretary hat, he is somehow freed from the burden of wearing the Parliamentarian hat.Well, say a member agrees to serve as parliamentarian at a meeting, and he is never called to service by the chair or membership, and due to the chair running a nice, parliamentarily clean meeting is never motivated to "call the attention of the chair" to any potential problem in the offing. That is, beyond paying attention and being at the ready, he never "acts" as a parliamentarian. He is still, per RONR, required to refrain from exercising his rights on nearly every occasion, and cannot even temporarily relinquish his position (as the chair is allowed) in order to do so. So, if he is serving simultaneously as both Secretary and Parliamentarian, is he ever not "on duty" as the parliamentarian? Is that hat ever off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted December 18, 2012 at 01:06 AM Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 at 01:06 AM Well, say a member agrees to serve as parliamentarian at a meeting . . .Well, I'm assuming in this instance that he holds the office of (capital "P") Parliamentarian and isn't just informally "serving" as a (lower-case "p") parliamentarian-in-waiting.So, if he is serving simultaneously as both Secretary and Parliamentarian, is he ever not "on duty" as the parliamentarian? Is that hat ever off?My understanding is that the hat doesn't come off until the meeting is adjourned. Thus he can not, like the chair, temporarily "step down" in order to more freely exercise his rights as a member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted December 19, 2012 at 03:27 PM Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 at 03:27 PM We may have covered this previously, but I can't recall if so and what the outcome may have been. As noted on p. 467, if the parliamentarian is a member of the assembly, he has the same duty to present a position of impartiality as the chair, and therefore does not make motions, speak in debate, nor vote except if the vote is by ballot.Being as Guest_Guest (why oh why can this forum not disallow "guest" as a user name?) would also be the secretary, he clearly would not get two votes. But would he at least get one, as secretary then? And could he make motions and speak in debate, as the secretary?Since the fundamental principle is "one person one vote" and never "one office one vote", nobody has a vote "as secretary". They have a vote as a member. If their duties preclude them from exercising it, then they are precluded. Otherwise they aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted December 20, 2012 at 01:33 AM Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 at 01:33 AM Well, say a member agrees to serve as parliamentarian at a meeting, and he is never called to service by the chair or membership, and due to the chair running a nice, parliamentarily clean meeting is never motivated to "call the attention of the chair" to any potential problem in the offing. That is, beyond paying attention and being at the ready, he never "acts" as a parliamentarian. He is still, per RONR, required to refrain from exercising his rights on nearly every occasion, and cannot even temporarily relinquish his position (as the chair is allowed) in order to do so.So, if he is serving simultaneously as both Secretary and Parliamentarian, is he ever not "on duty" as the parliamentarian? Is that hat ever off?If a member has agreed to serve as the Parliamentarian for an assembly, then he agrees not to speak in debate, make motions, or vote (except when the vote is by ballot), and RONR is quite clear that "Unlike the presiding officer, the parliamentarian cannot relinquish his position in order to exercise such rights on a particular motion" (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 467, lines 16-19). He is always "on duty" and always wears this hat during a meeting, and no exception is made for a Parliamentarian who also holds another office. This helps to ensure that the Parliamentarian is viewed as a fair and impartial adviser on parliamentary procedure.These rules are primarily designed, however, for an assembly that has need of a Parliamentarian who is always "on duty." If the assembly has no such need, which seems to be the case in the hypothetical meeting you have just described, it would likely be better for all involved if the chair simply requested advice from experienced members as needed (see RONR, 11th ed., pg. 254, lines 4-7) rather than appointing a Parliamentarian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted December 20, 2012 at 01:48 AM Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 at 01:48 AM Does the Chair need to appoint a new Parliamentarian, or may I serve in both capacities? So, Guest_Guest, any more questions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.