sratke Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:02 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:02 PM I'm unable to attend the annual meeting for a group I've served as parlimentary advisor, They have someone who's done the job in the past who's willing to do so again. Only problem is that he's the Treasurer. Common sense says that he can't serve as both, but could someone point me to the rule that says he can't serve as both? Much appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:13 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:13 PM Well, he can, but... He looses (almost) all membership rights as far as motions, voting, &c. go while he is serving as a member-parliamentarian. See p. 467, line 8ff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timothy Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:23 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:23 PM It isn't so much that he loses his rights, but he isn't completely fulfilling his duty if he exercises them. How big of a problem that is will be dependent on the situation and the organization. I expect that an officer serving as parliamentarian is better than having no parliamentarian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:38 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:38 PM As someone suggested recently in another thread about a "member parliamentarian", perhaps instead of serving as parliamentarian, you could serve as a "member knowledgeable in matters of parliamentary procedure" who the chairman can call upon for advice if he gets in a real jam. I know others won't like this, but it seems to me the assembly could also suspend the rules that interfere with the treasurer (or any member) exercising all rights of membership while serving as parliamentarian for the duration of this meeting. The provisions in RONR re a member serving as parliamentarian are on page 467 and provide as follows:"A member of an assembly who acts as its parliamentarian has the same duty as the presiding officer to maintain a position of impartiality, and therefore does not make motions, participate in debate, or vote on any question except in the case of a ballot vote. He does not cast a deciding vote, even if his vote would affect the result, since that would interfere with the chair's prerogative of doing so. If a member feels that he cannot properly forgo these rights in order to serve as parliamentarian, he should not accept that position. Unlike the presiding officer, the parliamentarian cannot temporarily relinquish his position in order to exercise such rights on a particular motion." Edited to add: The provisions on page 254 at lines 3 - 7 seem to say that the chair may call on a knowledgeable member for parliamentary advice:"Before rendering his decision, the chair can consult the parliamentarian, if there is one. The chair can also request the advice of experienced members, but no one has the right to express such opinions in the meeting unless requested to do so by the chair." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:45 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:45 PM I'm unable to attend the annual meeting for a group I've served as parlimentary advisor, The one word a parliamentarian should never misspell is "parliamentary". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sratke Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:53 PM Author Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:53 PM Thank you all for the posts and your thoughts/wisdom. I've got my answers and can forward my recommendations to the President. Thanks Richard for the actual text I needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:53 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 at 05:53 PM The one word a parliamentarian should never misspell is "parliamentary".It also should not be misspelled on the name tag lanyards at the National Association of Parliamentarians Training Conference. About half of us were "parlimentarians" for three days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted October 1, 2014 at 06:29 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 at 06:29 PM I expect that an officer serving as parliamentarian is better than having no parliamentarian. I very much doubt that this is the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timothy Posted October 1, 2014 at 06:44 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 at 06:44 PM As someone suggested recently in another thread about a "member parliamentarian", perhaps instead of serving as parliamentarian, you could serve as a "member knowledgeable in matters of parliamentary procedure" who the chairman can call upon for advice if he gets in a real jam. I've been serving as a "member knowledgeable in matters of parliamentary procedure" in one organization for several months. I've resisted the title of parliamentarian because I hold too many other positions to stay out of the debate. I'm the vice president of the organization, so I'm already seated near the president. I'm usually the person he asks if he is uncertain of the rules. When one of the committees needs guidance on parliamentary procedure, they usually look to me. In short, all the stuff a parliamentarian does, I'm doing. But we don't have a parliamentarian because we don't have someone who can fulfill the duties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.