Adopted Agenda, new business.

[DrEntropy]

This has likely been hashed out on this board in the past, but I could not find a clear discussion.

Q1: A society has general membership meetings monthly. The bylaws do not prescribe an order of business, and so the society follows the standard order of business on page 353 or RONR11. At a particularly busy meeting however, an agenda is proposed to be adopted in order to keep the meeting "tight". It conforms with the standard order of business, and after amendment still conforms with the standard order of business, although now several items are listed under new business. One amendment, to add item "X" under new business is defeated. The agenda is adopted by a majority vote in accordance with p 372 l.18-22. Under new business, each item of the agenda is covered as agreed, but then prior to adjournment, a member rises to make a motion related to X which is not on the agenda as mentioned above. Is this in order? I opined that it was since the agenda was not meant to confict with the standard order of business, and the standard order of business allows new items to be introduced under new business, so the motion was in order. In other words adopting the agenda did not in some way "close out" or limit new business to just those items in the adopted agenda under that category.

Q2: An agenda that did restrict new business could be adopted by a 2/3 vote, but how would this be worded? I have never seen anything like it, but I suspect it could be useful to help manage a tight meeting timeline. Perhaps a agenda item could be added "Other new bussiness: NONE" ?

[George Mervosh]

Q1 - I agree.

Q2 - I'll let someone else chime in, I've never seen it, have no clue, but it probably involves some suspension of the rules.

[David A Foulkes]

Q2: An agenda that did restrict new business could be adopted by a 2/3 vote, but how would this be worded? I have never seen anything like it, but I suspect it could be useful to help manage a tight meeting timeline. Perhaps a agenda item could be added "Other new bussiness: NONE" ?

This implies the agenda item "New Business", which I would think would still allow introduction of a "new business" motion not on the agenda, though.

[DrEntropy]

This implies the agenda item "New Business", which I would think would still allow introduction of a "new business" motion not on the agenda, though.

Oh, but of course, it is obvious now, simply adopt an agenda without a 'new business' category. This would require a 2/3 vote for a society in my example due the existing order of business.

[David A Foulkes]

Oh, but of course, it is obvious now, simply adopt an agenda without a 'new business' category. This would require a 2/3 vote for a society in my example due the existing order of business.

Let us know how that works out for you.

[DrEntropy]

Let us know how that works out for you.

  Q2 was hypothetical, but I see your point!

[Sean Hunt]

My interpretation, gleaned from other posts here, would be that it has nothing to do with the presence or absence of a "New Business" category, but rather than an agenda is merely a list of items which are scheduled to come up; usually general orders. An agenda is not a replacement for the order of business. Hence why it takes two-thirds to structure the agenda outside the normal order of business---if something is scheduled as a special order, then it requires two-thirds to put a general order before the special order.

Thus, once every item on the agenda has been completed, the order of business proceeds as normal, right into "New Business". If, however, the agenda listed that adjournment was to come right after the items listed (which become general orders by virtue of adopting the agenda), then adjournment comes up as scheduled and the assembly adjourns (since adjournment can happen at any time, scheduling adjournment before new business is not a suspension of the rules).

That's my understanding, and I'd appreciate if someone could correct me if I'm wrong.

[DrEntropy]

I had not thought of that, but it sure seems right. It seems you could put a time to adjourn on an agenda and still not confict with the normal order of business. After all one can adopt a main motion to adjourn at a certain time by a majority vote.