Guest Linda J Posted July 1, 2015 at 03:40 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 03:40 PM I understand that when a board debates or discusses a motion all comments should be directed to the Chair. Unfortunately, our meetings are a free- for- all and comments are addressed to other board members. I am fighting to get this under control. Any suggestions? Also, if we are discussing a report, strictly informational with no motions required, should board members only address presenter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted July 1, 2015 at 03:54 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 03:54 PM I understand that when a board debates or discusses a motion all comments should be directed to the Chair. Unfortunately, our meetings are a free- for- all and comments are addressed to other board members. I am fighting to get this under control. Any suggestions?When members start addressing their comments to anyone other than the Chair you can raise a Point of Order citing RONR p. 392. Hopefully the Chair will be on the ball and rule the Point Well Taken and direct the member(s) to address him or her (you can warn the Chair in advance this might happen so he or she isn't caught by surprise). Also, if we are discussing a report, strictly informational with no motions required, should board members only address presenter?Any comments should still be directed to the Chair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Linda J Posted July 1, 2015 at 04:15 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 04:15 PM What recommendations can I give to the Chair about discussions such as...1 comment per person...deciding how long discussion should be, etc., so that discussions don't get out of hand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted July 1, 2015 at 04:17 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 04:17 PM I am fighting to get this under control. Any suggestions? Depending on the size and nature of this board, the "relaxed rules" for small boards might be appropriate. See pp.487-488. Certainly the meeting shouldn't descend into a "free-for-all" but neither must it be excessively formal. An experienced chair should be able to strike a balance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Linda J Posted July 1, 2015 at 05:56 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 05:56 PM There are 24 members of our board. We don't stand to speak and "relaxed rules" do apply but we do need to introduce more formality than we have because this isn't working. I'd like to make a few suggestions on speaking so that we can eliminate all of the back and forth that leads to trouble. I'd like to suggest to Chair that all members speak once around before second comments follow but how do you work this if one person has all the relevant info and needs to speak if wrong statements are made or to clarify? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted July 1, 2015 at 06:05 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 06:05 PM There are 24 members of our board. Well, that's clearly not a "small" board. You say "this isn't working". Are you the only one who thinks so? Are you in the minority? In any event, this isn't rocket science (no offense intended). Grown-ups should know how to behave themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Linda J Posted July 1, 2015 at 06:16 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 06:16 PM Everyone knows that it isn't working.... The problem is that very few are educated as to good practice. I am trying to eliminate group think and self-censhorship. Also, I'd like to have some order in place so that our meetings are not derailed by a few who protest everything leading to free-for-all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted July 1, 2015 at 06:34 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 06:34 PM Buy the chair a copy of RONR in Brief. It's only $7.50 and an excellent guide to proper meeting procedure. You might even consider having the board pay for a copy for each member. http://www.robertsrules.com/inbrief.html And make sure that the chair, at least, has a copy of RONR. http://www.robertsrules.com/book.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 1, 2015 at 06:36 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 06:36 PM What recommendations can I give to the Chair about discussions such as...1 comment per person...deciding how long discussion should be, etc., so that discussions don't get out of hand?Your original post mentions both debate on a pending motion and questions for an informational report. These are two very different situations, and I'm not sure which you're referring to, so I'll handle both separately.In debate on a pending motion, the default rule is that each member may speak twice for up to ten minutes each on each debatable motion, but there is no limit to the total length of debate. The board may set different limits for a particular motion by means of a motion to Limit Debate, or adopt its own special rules of order governing limits on debate to apply to all cases. The former requires a 2/3 vote and is not debatable. The latter is debatable and requires a 2/3 vote with previous notice, or a vote of a majority of the entire membership.When asking questions on a report for information only, these hard and fast limits do not apply... but only questions are in order, and the chair should not permit the questioning to turn into debate.I'd like to suggest to Chair that all members speak once around before second comments follow but how do you work this if one person has all the relevant info and needs to speak if wrong statements are made or to clarify?You should indeed suggest this, as this is the rule. If there is a situation where "one person has all the relevant info," the simplest solution to this is probably for other members who desire clarification to ask questions of this member as needed, by means of a Request for Information. Any other method would certainly require a 2/3 vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Linda J Posted July 1, 2015 at 06:52 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 06:52 PM Buy the chair a copy of RONR in Brief. It's only $7.50 and an excellent guide to proper meeting procedure. You might even consider having the board pay for a copy for each member. http://www.robertsrules.com/inbrief.html And make sure that the chair, at least, has a copy of RONR. http://www.robertsrules.com/book.htmlI am running out now to buy several copies. Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Linda J Posted July 1, 2015 at 06:53 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 06:53 PM Your original post mentions both debate on a pending motion and questions for an informational report. These are two very different situations, and I'm not sure which you're referring to, so I'll handle both separately.In debate on a pending motion, the default rule is that each member may speak twice for up to ten minutes each on each debatable motion, but there is no limit to the total length of debate. The board may set different limits for a particular motion by means of a motion to Limit Debate, or adopt its own special rules of order governing limits on debate to apply to all cases. The former requires a 2/3 vote and is not debatable. The latter is debatable and requires a 2/3 vote with previous notice, or a vote of a majority of the entire membership.When asking questions on a report for information only, these hard and fast limits do not apply... but only questions are in order, and the chair should not permit the questioning to turn into debate.You should indeed suggest this, as this is the rule. If there is a situation where "one person has all the relevant info," the simplest solution to this is probably for other members who desire clarification to ask questions of this member as needed, by means of a Request for Information. Any other method would certainly require a 2/3 vote.Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Linda J Posted July 1, 2015 at 07:41 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 07:41 PM One more question...If a member makes a statement that is not true during debate how does another person with relevant information speak to this if they have already spoken twice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted July 1, 2015 at 07:50 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 07:50 PM One more question...If a member makes a statement that is not true during debate how does another person with relevant information speak to this if they have already spoken twice?He can't. But,, if he can find someone who hasn't spoken twice who is willing to point it out he can ask that person to do so. However, what is "true" could be a matter of opinion so when speaking in debate the member needs to careful not to imply the other person was lying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted July 1, 2015 at 08:19 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 08:19 PM He can't. But,, if he can find someone who hasn't spoken twice who is willing to point it out he can ask that person to do so. However, what is "true" could be a matter of opinion so when speaking in debate the member needs to careful not to imply the other person was lying. But see this post. And couldn't a member raise a Point of Information (or some such thing) even if he has already spoken twice in debate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted July 1, 2015 at 08:29 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 08:29 PM One more question...If a member makes a statement that is not true during debate how does another person with relevant information speak to this if they have already spoken twice? He can obtain the floor and move to postpone the motion indefinitely, which will allow him to speak further. A more direct route might be an artfully worded Request for Information where he can get his point across by asking a question - "Isn't it true that........" or something along those lines, being very careful it stays in the form of a question to the chair and not debate on the motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Linda J Posted July 1, 2015 at 09:16 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 09:16 PM He can obtain the floor and move to postpone the motion indefinitely, which will allow him to speak further. A more direct route might be an artfully worded Request for Information where he can get his point across by asking a question - "Isn't it true that........" or something along those lines, being very careful it stays in the form of a question to the chair and not debate on the motion.So, raise hand and state...Request for Information...and then "Isn't it true that...". If the Chair doesn't answer in the affirmative does this lead to a back and forth between the person with false info and the person with correct info? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted July 1, 2015 at 10:16 PM Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 at 10:16 PM So, raise hand and state...Request for, Information...and then "Isn't it true that...". If the Chair doesn't answer in the affirmative does this lead to a back and forth between the person with false info and the person with correct info? Well, the way it works is you (addressing the Chair) ask if the member would be willing to yield for (or be asked) a question. The member doesn't have to agree to the question (and if he doesn't you will be out of luck). If the member does consent to the question you (still addressing the Chair) would ask it. The time for you asking the question and any response comes out of his time so unless he is sympathetic to your cause (or at least is willing to hear you out) I wouldn't bet on him consenting to the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 2, 2015 at 12:19 AM Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 at 12:19 AM So, raise hand and state...Request for Information...and then "Isn't it true that...". If the Chair doesn't answer in the affirmative does this lead to a back and forth between the person with false info and the person with correct info? Absolutely not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Linda J Posted July 2, 2015 at 12:58 AM Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 at 12:58 AM Absolutely not.I was under the impression that one addressed the Chair to be recognized, but I guess I was wrong, as Chris mentioned above, in that the question goes to the person who presented the wrong info.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 2, 2015 at 02:58 AM Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 at 02:58 AM I was under the impression that one addressed the Chair to be recognized, but I guess I was wrong, as Chris mentioned above, in that the question goes to the person who presented the wrong info.... Well, let me clarify that. It is absolutely correct that a member addresses the chair to be recognized. Nonetheless, if someone is interrupting a member speaking in debate, he would do so for the purpose of asking that member a question (although, as a formality, he asks the question through the chair), and that member would respond (assuming the member consents to the interruption at all). If the member asked the question when no member had the floor, he could ask the question of the member who presented the wrong info, or of the chair, or of any other member (although, again, he asks the question through the chair). That wasn't what I was referring to. You asked whether, if the chair suggested that the information was mistaken, "does this lead to a back and forth between the person with false info and the person with correct info?" The answer to that question is "Absolutely not." The member who presented the wrong info cannot interject into this situation. If the question was not addressed to him, he will need to raise his own Request for Information (in the form of a question) or speak again in debate if he feels he needs to clarify his earlier point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Linda J Posted July 2, 2015 at 10:46 AM Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 at 10:46 AM Well, let me clarify that. It is absolutely correct that a member addresses the chair to be recognized. Nonetheless, if someone is interrupting a member speaking in debate, he would do so for the purpose of asking that member a question (although, as a formality, he asks the question through the chair), and that member would respond (assuming the member consents to the interruption at all). If the member asked the question when no member had the floor, he could ask the question of the member who presented the wrong info, or of the chair, or of any other member (although, again, he asks the question through the chair). That wasn't what I was referring to. You asked whether, if the chair suggested that the information was mistaken, "does this lead to a back and forth between the person with false info and the person with correct info?" The answer to that question is "Absolutely not." The member who presented the wrong info cannot interject into this situation. If the question was not addressed to him, he will need to raise his own Request for Information (in the form of a question) or speak again in debate if he feels he needs to clarify his earlier point.If the Chair does not know the answer to this -"Isn't it true question"- as per George above...does the person asking -"Isn't it true"- respond again. I'm trying to imagine how this looks when played out so I can understand the procedure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 2, 2015 at 04:51 PM Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 at 04:51 PM If the Chair does not know the answer to this -"Isn't it true question"- as per George above...does the person asking -"Isn't it true"- respond again. I'm trying to imagine how this looks when played out so I can understand the procedure.The chair could refer the question to someone who knows the answer, or just leave it at that. The person asking the question doesn't respond - he can't answer his own question. Request for Information is used to ask a question, not to cut in line in debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Linda J Posted July 2, 2015 at 09:11 PM Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 at 09:11 PM The chair could refer the question to someone who knows the answer, or just leave it at that. The person asking the question doesn't respond - he can't answer his own question. Request for Information is used to ask a question, not to cut in line in debate. In this case-"Isn't it true" - is rhetorical because the person with the info is posing the question to counteract the member with the false information. The original premise was that the person had already spoken twice but needed to correct false statement from other member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 3, 2015 at 04:29 PM Report Share Posted July 3, 2015 at 04:29 PM In this case-"Isn't it true" - is rhetorical because the person with the info is posing the question to counteract the member with the false information. The original premise was that the person had already spoken twice but needed to correct false statement from other member.I understand that. Nonetheless, the only way to do this is by asking a question (rhetorical or otherwise), and the member cannot answer his own question.Another way of addressing this might be for the member to nudge someone else to ask the question of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted July 3, 2015 at 05:20 PM Report Share Posted July 3, 2015 at 05:20 PM I understand that. Nonetheless, the only way to do this is by asking a question (rhetorical or otherwise), and the member cannot answer his own question.Another way of addressing this might be for the member to nudge someone else to ask the question of him.I agree. Two other methods of having more discussion/debate are for the assembly to grant unanimous consent for additional comments by one or two members or for the assembly to adopt a motion extending the limits of debate to allow additional speeches by each member. That, too, can be done by unanimous consent. If anyone objects, it would require a two thirds vote to adopt such a motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.