Absent- but wanting submissions and views read in

[Guest D.Llama]

1)  A matter of business  is scheduled on the agenda for determination . Member X  cannot attend the meeting so she writes in before the meeting (to the Chair)   asking that her  important views on the proposal, be read in by the Chair, during debate on the main motion . Is there any obligation  ( applying RONR ) that the chair read the submissions in during the debate, or even mention to the members present at the meeting , that  X has made such a request ? 

2) Same facts as 1) , above- except Chair does  advise members present at the meeting  that X has made the request . In this circumstance if the Chair then  receives/obtains  unanimous consent, may the written views of X be read in, by the chair,   during debate of the main motion ? 

3) If unanimous consent is not available to read in ,would a vote ,carried by majority, be sufficient  for a read in  of the views of X ,during debate  of the main motion ? 

 

Thank -you for any views on this inquiry .

 

D.Llama 

[Gary c Tesser]

I'm looking at page 28, lines 11 - 17 or so, and p. 355, line 33, but I get this wrong every few years.

1.  Does p. 298 - 299 help?

2.  With general consent, how could it not be so?

3.  I would guess so, unless we figure that it's a violation of a rule (I'm failing to come up with which one), in which case we would have to suspend the rules, yes?

[jstackpo]

It might be better protocol if the "absent member" got an attending member friend to make the desired arguments.

This will help to maintain the chair's (presumed) impartiality in the matter, as he should always be.  Also there will be no question about the mechanics of introducing the arguments since an attending member will be doing the debating.  The attending member still has to get permission to actually read a document (p. 298) as contrasted with just speaking on the issue.

[Guest D.Llama]

Thank - you Gary T.  and Dr.  Stackpole .

While  RONR  298 - 299 is helpful respecting points 2 and 3, raised above - those pages do not seem to apply to  situation 1  . This is  seemingly  not a  Request to Read Papers .Member X is not attempting in debate to "read a paper or book as part of his speech" . Member  X is simply not present to read anything .She wants someone else to read in her debate . 

Although I would be very pleased to hear from anyone on this point  who can better illumination this , from what I can fathom ,   the right of a member to speak in debate  (RONR p. 3 , line 1-5 ) is one that can only be exercised by being present and doing  as much . It cannot be done by a designate,  agent, or nominee . And  although a Chair may have discretion to consider   options 2 and 3 above  ( in situation 1) - the Chair has no obligation whatsoever to do as much and may simply disregard the request from X without  any mention mention whatsoever of the request- to the assembly . Although doing so may  later turn out to be  less than politic - it nevertheless is a road a Chair may go down without violation of RONR . 

However  , as mentioned , I would be much obliged for any more informed view-  on  this point . 

Thank-you .

D.Llama 

[Richard Brown]

Reading a paper is reading a paper regardless of whose paper it is or what it says or why it is being read.

[Guest D.Llama]

Thanks for that  view Richard  B.

 RONR seems to refer to " his paper  "- read by him.That is - something  in some manner  adopted by that particular member speaking in debate -  as his views or thought otherwise   applicable   by him or her .  Obliged , but I do not  see  this as  persuasive   that the Chair has some obligation to read in  the debate of member X  when those  are not adopted , defended or offered   by that member -  the Chair . Are there any other perspectives - or  those supportive of the Chair having some obligation to do this at the request of member X ?  I'm often wrong when it comes to RONR - maybe again this time ! Thanks .

DL

 

 

[Steven Britton]

What you're describing IMO, is correspondence; there is nothing in RONR that requires or prohibits its reading. It's up to the assembly to determine whether to permit its reading.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

9 hours ago, Guest D.Llama said:

Are there any other perspectives - or  those supportive of the Chair having some obligation to do this at the request of member X ?

Consider this set of assumptions:

1.) Per strict application of Robert's Rules, a chair goes not engage in debate.

2.) The absent member wishes to engage in debate, using a written format.

3.) The request  of the absent member is that the chair engage in debate, using the written words of the absent member.

4.) But this request violates the duty of the chair (see #1 above) to not engage in debate.

My conclusion:

• The chair should obey Robert's Rules of Order. The chair should not engage in debate.

• If an absent member wishes his written argument to be read aloud in debate, the absent member, on his own, must solicit an attending member to read his written argument aloud.

• The chair is under no obligation to read aloud another member's written argument during the debate portion of the meeting.

 

 

[Joshua Katz]

I'm not sure about 3.

[Guest D.Llama]

Thank you Steven and Kim. Both of your contributions much  appreciated . 

KG - I cannot agree with your number 3 above as member X is not asking the Chair to engage in debate - he is asking the Chair to read in what X wants to say in debate . But I fully agree with the conclusion that the chair has no obligation to read in the debate of X . Nor in my view does the chair have any obligation to even mention that the chair has received the request .

And also of note    I came across the following - in PL ( pages 176 , 510)

"If during debate the speaker wishes to read or have read any printed document , or copy thereof ,or even a written speech , and anyone objects , he cannot read it unless leave to read it is granted by a majority vote . If it were not for this rule , members might occupy the full time allowed them by the rules in reading printed documents or speeches prepared by others ." ( emphasis added)

and 

"The rule is not intended to prevent a member from quoting printed or written articles .......to strengthen his argument " 

Again , here member X is not asking the chair to make her  " speech " part of any debate by the chair . She simply wants the chair to read it in - as member X debate . Member X is attempting to use the chair to facilitate her debate and not to use the chair to augment any debate of the chair . The chair can simply refuse and ignore the request or advise member X before the meeting ( time allowing ) that the chair will not attempt to read in member X debate . Or the chair could exercise discretion and seek to deal with this by a motion to allow the reading in - or  allowance by unanimous consent to read in . Or so it seems to me so far . 

Thanks  very much to all for comments . This came in on Thursday of this week . 

Much obliged . 

DL 

 

 

 

 

[Guest D.llama]

And  thanks Godelfan . Yours came in while I was finishing mine . 

DL 

[Steven Britton]

7 minutes ago, Guest D.Llama said:

Again , here member X is not asking the chair to make her  " speech " part of any debate by the chair . She simply wants the chair to read it in - as member X debate . Member X is attempting to use the chair to facilitate her debate and not to use the chair to augment any debate of the chair . The chair can simply refuse and ignore the request or advise member X before the meeting ( time allowing ) that the chair will not attempt to read in member X debate . Or the chair could exercise discretion and seek to deal with this by a motion to allow the reading in - or  allowance by unanimous consent to read in . Or so it seems to me so far .

Generally, correspondence is read by the secretary. Also, any member could objection by moving the incidental motion, Object to Consideration.(p. 268, ll. 1 - 3). A two-thirds vote against consideration is necessary.

[Gary Novosielski]

3 hours ago, Godelfan said:

I'm not sure about 3.

It may be a stretch.  What if the chair instructed the secretary to read it?

In any case, I think it's safe to say that if the member wishes to assert her right to participate in debate, the only foolproof way is to show up at meetings.

[Guest D.Llama]

Thanks Gary.

 I think this has  no such stretch -available . 

 Were the Chair to instruct the secretary to read  the debate of X - all that would amount to would be the Chair using an agent to do   something  the Chair   cannot do himself/herself  . It could easily lead to a point of order ,and then an   appeal  on the decision of the Chair - to do so . And   that appeal  based  on good grounds . 

And such a reading in  were allowed it could  create a very unhealthy precedent . If one member can do it - why not three or four , or ten - that are absent -  many members  writing in asking for their debate to be read in . Yikes. 

 If very important - show up !

Obliged 

 

DL 

[jstackpo]

"Unhealthy precedent"  --  oh, maybe not.  Don't forget that a majority can say "We don't want hear this read to us" and that will be the end of it. And if you are in the middle of a debate on a (formal) motion, it only requires 1/3 to prevent the "reading". Other folks would get the message.

[Guest D.Llama]

Thank-you Dr.  Stackpole  :

Well for sure - this is certainly  true .Indeed a body could go even farther- and allow for such  in their bylaws  . "Healthy" , like other things  may   be  said to be ,in the "eye of the assembly" ! Obliged . 

 

DL