time limitations on speakers at special meetings

[bobby101]

Gentlemen: In my most recent posting under, "Time Limitations of Speakers", Mr Guest suggested I start a separate posting with my question. You can refer to my original posting to get some background. Since I've not received any responses since Mr. Guest's posting about 24 hours ago, I thought I'd try again. So, here goes: I am probably going to have to petition for a special meeting to address some issues that I and others have identified that involve violations by the Board(s) of our Club's by-laws, violations that the Board(s) refuse to acknowledge. Since this will be a special meeting of the membership, my understanding is that the Board has no special standing or rights distinct from  the rights of all our members. My question is whether  my speaking time can be extended beyond the two 10 minute spots that are identified in RONR, pp. 387-89? Does the assembly have the right to do this by a 2/3 vote and what's the mechanism to address this and get the issue before the assembly? Injecting reality into this situation is that I expect the Board(s) who have vigorously opposed admitting their failings will mobilize their forces in every way they can to avoid this confrontation. My feeling is that if I'm successful in getting the meeting called, the facts of the situation to be presented are so clear, compelling, and irrefutable that the membership will validate our point of view and decide what to do. I am not seeking any kind of punishment, removal from office, or censure--just an acknowledgement that the by-laws have been violated and to make all subsequent Boards aware of what can happen if this kind of activity happens again. There is no mention of any kind of time limit for speakers in our by-laws. Thank you

[Richard Brown]

You have a couple of options:  One is a motion to extend the time for debate to allow all members additional time, such as to extend the limit of debate to 15 minutes per speech.  I have a hunch such a motion would not be well received.  Most people I know think that ten minutes per speech is an outrageous amount of time.  A motion to limit or extend the limits of debate requires a two thirds vote.  The motion can apply to  the entire session or just to one agenda item such as the pending question.  It's covered in RONR in the section you already cited.

 

Another approach is ask that you be granted additional time to make your presentation.  Usually that is done by unanimous consent, but I have a feeling there might be an objection to that.  You or someone on your behalf can make a motion that you be granted X number of minutes to  make a presentation about the proposed bylaw changes.  Such a motion would also require a two thirds vote because it amounts to a suspension of the rules.

 

But, I'm wondering why you think you need more than ten minutes to make a presentation?  I don't know your exact situation with your organization, but based on everything I've read that you've posted over the past nine months or so, I have a hunch you are going to lose people's interest...and votes.... if you drone on for ten minutes.  You might consider finding someone who agrees with you who can make a good presentation to supplement yours.

 

Other regular posters may have other ideas.

[bobby101]

Mr. Brown: Thank you for your response and common sense options that are consistent with RONR. I'll await what I hope will be more responses from other Forum members and guests before I respond more fully to your points. Thank you

[Dan Honemann]

 

 

Mr. Brown: Thank you for your response and common sense options that are consistent with RONR. I'll await what I hope will be more responses from other Forum members and guests before I respond more fully to your points. Thank you

 

Okay, but please don't respond to the question about why you think you need more than ten minutes to make a presentation. Your reasons for wanting more time are irrelevant. 

[bobby101]

Mr. Honemann: When the issue is the Board's violating the by-laws, sanctioning members, ignoring the point that violations of the by-laws are null and void, exposing the entire membership to a possible suit that could result in significant damage to the way the Club could function, and ignoring requests to address the situation, I think the additional time request is both appropriate and relevant. But I'm smart enough not to argue the law with a lawyer or RONR with a person of your experience and standing within the RONR community. To do justice to the way these Board(s) have mishandled their jobs, betrayed the trust of the membership, misused their power and position, acted in a vindictive way against the 3 members whose rights (clearly stated in the Club's by-laws) they ignored, and evaded any sense of responsibility for their actions would require more than 30 or so minutes.

[Dan Honemann]

You asked:

 

"My question is whether  my speaking time can be extended beyond the two 10 minute spots that are identified in RONR, pp. 387-89? Does the assembly have the right to do this by a 2/3 vote and what's the mechanism to address this and get the issue before the assembly?"

 

I'll say again - your reasons for wanting more time are irrelevant. 

[Gary Novosielski]

Mr. Honemann: When the issue is....

 

Your reasons are certainly relevant within the context of your club's meeting.  They are not relevant to the parliamentary questions that you raise here.

[George Mervosh]

Your reasons are certainly relevant within the context of your club's meeting.  They are not relevant to the parliamentary questions that you raise here.

 

They're not relevant at all in a meeting setting because the motion to extend debate is not debatable, so he can't explain his reasoning at the meeting.

[Gary Novosielski]

Sure he can, as long as he does it in the first 9 1/2 minutes, reserving 30 seconds or so to move to extend the limits of debate, or to suspend the rules or what have you.