Rights of Non-Members attending AGM

[Guest Trish R.]

What are the rights of non-members attending the AGM of a Society. Are they entitled to speak from the floor or do they require permission from the chair, or the assembled members, to speak? Know that non-members do not have a vote, but can they move motions? Can they raise a point of order? Do they have any other rights on the floor? I will be chairing the AGM Thank you.

[Edgar Guest]

Only members (of the body that is meeting) have any parliamentary rights. Non-members have none. They don't even have a right to be there.

 

Non-members can, however, be permitted (by the assembly) to attend and speak. And the assembly can admit some non-members and exclude others. And it can permit some non-members to speak but not others.

[Richard Brown]

Agreeing with Mr. Guest, if there is a non member in attendance who you know has important information to share with the assembly, you can, as chair, allow him to address the membership by unanimous consent if no one objects. 

 

You could do it like this:  "Mayor Sinkbottom is here and would like to address the assembly regarding the tax propositions that will appear on the November 4 ballot.  Is there any objection to granting him five minutes to address the assembly regarding the upcoming tax propositions?  Hearing no objection, Mayor Sinkbottom is granted five minutes to address the assembly about the upcoming tax propositions".

 

If there is an objection, they you will have to go through the motions, if anyone is so inclined, of someone making a formal motion that he be allowed to address the assembly.  Doing so might also require a suspension of the rules if it involves amending the agenda or interrupting business. 

 

If he is there to speak on an item that is on the agenda or during debate on an item of pending business, suspending the rules would not be necessary and he could be granted the permission to speak by majority vote (or unanimous consent).    

[Guest Trish R.]

Thank you both so much for your comments. Do you know Sections of Robert's Rules that I can refer to should I be challenged on requiring consent of the assembled members? I am expecting a non-member to raise a matter that is not on the agenda and being insistent on addressing the assembly. And I want to be on really solid ground in the manner in which I deal with this. My thanks again!

[Richard Brown]

It's in RONR in several places.   It's also a fundamental principle of parliamentary law that only members have the right to attend and participate in meetings of a society unless there is a rule or statute giving non members rights.
 
The footnote on page 63 says that ". . . the rules may be suspended to allow a nonmember to speak in debate".
 
On page 644, starting on line 22, RONR says: 
 
"PRINCIPLES GOVERNING DISCIPLINE AT MEETINGS. A society has the right to determine who may be present at its meetings and to control its hall while meetings are in progress; but all members have the right to attend except in cases where the bylaws provide for the automatic suspension of members who fall in arrears in payment of their dues, or where the society has, by vote and as a penalty imposed for a specific offense, forbidden attendance.
Nonmembers, on the other hand—or a particular nonmember or group of nonmembers—can be excluded at any time from part or all of a meeting of a society, or from all of its meetings. Such exclusion can be effected by a ruling of the chair in cases of disorder, or by the adoption of a rule on the subject, or by an appropriate motion as the need arises—a motion of the latter nature being a question of privilege [page 645] (19). A motion to exclude all nonmembers (except absolutely necessary staff, if any) is often referred to as a motion to "go into executive session" (see 9)."
 
Then, on page 648, RONR provides as follows starting on line 11:
 
" Any nonmembers allowed in the hall during a meeting, as guests of the organization, have no rights with reference to the proceedings (pp. 644–45). An assembly has the right to protect itself from annoyance by nonmembers, and its full authority in this regard—as distinguished from cases involving disorderly members—can be exercised by the chair acting alone. The chair has the power to require nonmembers to leave the hall, or to order their removal, at any time during the meeting; and the nonmembers have no right of appeal from such an order of the presiding officer. However, such an order may be appealed by a member."
 
That should pretty much cover it for you.
 
Edited to add:  If you are the presiding officer, get yourself a copy of RONR 11th edition asap.  Don't settle for anything less. http://www.robertsrules.com/book.html

[Josh Martin]

If he is there to speak on an item that is on the agenda or during debate on an item of pending business, suspending the rules would not be necessary and he could be granted the permission to speak by majority vote (or unanimous consent).    

 

This is not correct. A motion to Suspend the Rules is required to permit a non-member to speak in debate. A majority vote is sufficient to let a non-member speak when no motion is pending (assuming, as you have noted, that this does not interfere with the order of business).

[Richard Brown]

A motion to Suspend the Rules is required to permit a non-member to speak in debate. A majority vote is sufficient to let a non-member speak when no motion is pending (assuming, as you have noted, that this does not interfere with the order of business).

 

Mr. Martin is correct.  In fact, the footnote on the bottom of page263 which I quoted says that the rules must be suspended to allow a non member to speak in debate.  My mistake.

[Guest Trish R.]

My thanks once again, This is exactly what I need! About to invest in RONR 11th Edition!

[Gary c Tesser]

My thanks once again, This is exactly what I need! About to invest in RONR 11th Edition!

 

I expect I'm not alone in suggesting emphatically that you first get your RONR - In Brief, without delay, and read it at once.  I keep saying, if you go to a store to buy it, read it standing there.  Maybe move away from in front of the cashier, to allow the other customers to buy their copies.  It should take you an hour or so, unless you're a college graduate -- they can take all day, tomorrow also if they have to tie their shoelaces themselves.  If you're on a lunch break, you'll just have to get back a little late.  If people are depending on you to feed them -- relax, they won't starve.  If you're there by car, give your keys to that cashier, who will be allowed to return them to you when you're finished.  If you have ordered it by mail, don't take the time to get a box-cutter to open the carton:  just have at it with your fangs and claws -- you're going to chair an AGM, so you need the practice anyway.

[Guest Trish R.]

Brilliant! Am on it!

[Gary Novosielski]

What are the rights of non-members attending the AGM of a Society. Are they entitled to speak from the floor or do they require permission from the chair, or the assembled members, to speak? Know that non-members do not have a vote, but can they move motions? Can they raise a point of order? Do they have any other rights on the floor? I will be chairing the AGM Thank you.

They have no rights at all, including being there in the first place.

 

All rights granted to them are granted by the assembly, by majority vote for quietly observing, or for addressing the assembly (while no question is pending).  Making motions, speaking in debate, and similar activities (reserved by rule to members only) would require a 2/3 vote (suspension of the rules).   Raising a point of order is tantamount to making a motion.

 

Voting rights may not be granted to a non-member under any circumstances*, not even by a unanimous vote of the assembly.

 

__________

* Well, any circumstances short of admitting them as a member.

[Guest Jane]

Just wondering if you can help me. What if an attendee to a meeting was a member during the year in question that is being discussed at the AGM but is no longer a member of the organisation? 

[Josh Martin]

1 hour ago, Guest Jane said:

Just wondering if you can help me. What if an attendee to a meeting was a member during the year in question that is being discussed at the AGM but is no longer a member of the organisation? 

It makes no difference. The person is either a member or he is not. Whether he usd to be a member is irrelevant. If this person is no longer a member, he has none of the rights of membership.

[Guest Jane]

Joe, a member of a society, which incorporates RONR latest edition in its entirety, falls afoul of the President. Bylaws constrain the President.  They require the board to create committees, and to appoint committee members.  Yet, the President creates an ethics committee, appoints it’s members.  When challenged, the President admits this is illegal per the bylaws. The president then proceeds anyway, sends joe as section of RONR with the rights of the accused removed (such as right to cross examine, and a 15 minute total time limit), and removes Joe in a late night online meeting by vote of 1/3 of the board, which under bylaws has a small quorum. 

Joe clearly has not been removed legally for a number of reasons.  Joe’s attempt to raise the issue have not made it past the president. 
Joe is denied access to the member list. Is Joe wishes to attend the AGM to raise the behaviour of the President.  
 

[Gödel Fan]

Please post questions as a new topic, even it they are similar to an existing topic.

I think Joe should attend, vote, and make motions. The chair will rule, sua sponte, that Joe has no such rights. He can appeal and make his case.

But first, he needs to contact other members, explain the situation, and get people on his side. He should line people up in roles, even having someone else who will appeal if his appeal is not recognized. Optimally, they should game it out and practice.

[Josh Martin]

6 hours ago, Guest Jane said:

Joe, a member of a society, which incorporates RONR latest edition in its entirety, falls afoul of the President. Bylaws constrain the President.  They require the board to create committees, and to appoint committee members.  Yet, the President creates an ethics committee, appoints it’s members.  When challenged, the President admits this is illegal per the bylaws. The president then proceeds anyway, sends joe as section of RONR with the rights of the accused removed (such as right to cross examine, and a 15 minute total time limit), and removes Joe in a late night online meeting by vote of 1/3 of the board, which under bylaws has a small quorum. 

Joe clearly has not been removed legally for a number of reasons.  Joe’s attempt to raise the issue have not made it past the president. 
Joe is denied access to the member list. Is Joe wishes to attend the AGM to raise the behaviour of the President.  

Please post your question as a new topic. When you do so, please provide what (if anything) your bylaws say regarding discipline of members.

Edited October 31, 2020 at 02:45 PM by Josh Martin