putting off/continuing an agenda item

[New Secretary]

Folks,

Our 9-unit condominium association is used to seeing a combination Notice/Agenda from the secretary--which is now yours-truly.  The final item on the executive board agenda for an upcoming meeting will not yet be timely for discussion.  When the notice went out, there was a good chance that it would have been ready for discussion, thus its inclusion.  It is expected to become timely within a few days of the upcoming meeting; and if and when it does become timely, the board will likely call another meeting to deal with that one item.

What is the proper method of handling the aforementioned item on the upcoming meeting agenda?  Thank you, as always.

 

 

[Joshua Katz]

So far as RONR is concerned, your agenda is a proposed agenda until approved at the meeting. The Secretary cannot make an agenda, only the body can adopt one. (An agenda is also not a list of items for discussion, but that's another story.) So just remove it before you approve the agenda.

If other rules apply, such as applicable procedural laws, that might complicate things, but in general, not doing something on your "agenda" is easier than doing something not on it.

[jstackpo]

If your condo association is in the habit of adopting the agenda (the list of business items/motions, &c, that are or were anticipated to need to be brought up), then when the agenda is moved for adoption, simply move to strike the untimely item from the list before adopting the (reduced) list.

If the agenda list is not customarily adopted, but just serves as a reminder for the presiding officer, he/she just need not mention the untimely item at all.

2 minutes ago, Joshua Katz said:

(An agenda is also not a list of items for discussion, but that's another story.)

Oh yes it is - see RONR, p. 371, line 17ff.

[Joshua Katz]

4 minutes ago, jstackpo said:

Oh yes it is - see RONR, p. 371, line 17ff.

It defines an agenda as a series of special orders and/or general orders, i.e. business items. It does not define an agenda as a list of "discussion items."

[jstackpo]

I took the OP's use of "discussion" to mean a consideration and decision (by vote) of a piece of (formal) business.  Maybe the OP can correct me as necessary.

[Joshua Katz]

Fair enough. I took it to mean discussion. I guess we'll both have to wait and find out.

[New Secretary]

Thank you for the thoughts.  We are extremely dysfunctional, with great difficulty getting folks to sit on the board, and even greater difficulty convincing folks that the laws, governing instruments, and RONR apply to small associations like our where "everybody gets along", which we do not. "We're not General Motors" after all, is the constant refrain.  But somebody has to make sure the lights don't go out.

Every time something happens that is in conformance with RONR, arguments break out, because "that's not how we do it here."  Much time is then spent explaining the what and why of it.  So small steps are in order.

[Joshua Katz]

Small steps are in order, and you might consider trying to hold a class on RONR, etc. outside the meeting context. During a meeting, you're trying to accomplish business, and it's not the best environment for learning new ways of doing things. As the General put it, meetings are not classes in parliamentary procedure. When there's nothing to accomplish, people might be more open to learning new things.

You might also point out that, even if everyone gets along, at some point in the future a new board might not get along, and an established habit of doing things in an orderly fashion will be helpful. Or, my go to: using effective procedure gets me home for dinner earlier.

It's good to hear, though, that your organization will not be laying off 15k people and closing factories.

[Guest Who's Coming to Dinner]

33 minutes ago, Back_On_The_Board_Aug_2018 said:

Every time something happens that is in conformance with RONR, arguments break out, because "that's not how we do it here."

Then you should set a formal tone for your meetings from the outset. Misbehavior is often facilitated by a loose, casual atmosphere. The chair must be polite but very firm and not brook disruption.

[New Secretary]

That is

7 minutes ago, Guest Who's Coming to Dinner said:

Then you should set a formal tone for your meetings from the outset. Misbehavior is often facilitated by a loose, casual atmosphere. The chair must be polite but very firm and not brook disruption.

Beibng more formal is what this new board is doing, but the distrust can be difficult.  And pointing to RONR brings the long-standing and somewhat legitimate gripe that "the rules" are only followed when it suits the board, and some folks then presume we're trying to put something over on them.  So, as indicated by the previous poster, we are trying small steps and picking our battles. 

Our meetings have always been somewhat informal, as in often approaching free-for-alls.  So when I informed non-board-member owners at our annual/organizational board meeting with 2 of the 3 members being newly elected and attending, and the "experienced" 3rd member not in attendance, that we would be using small-meeting procedures,  I was dismissively accused of making things up, and here we go again, etc.   I was ready with RONR in hand, but it can be disruptive and disheartening.
 

[Richard Brown]

Perhaps this passage on page 456 of the 11th edition of RONR will be helpful.  It's in a section on "Suggestions for Inexperienced Presiding Officers":

"The president should never be technical or more strict than is necessary for the good of the meeting. Good judgment is essential; the assembly may be of such a nature, through its unfamiliarity with parliamentary usage and its peaceable disposition, that strict enforcement of the rules, instead of assisting, would greatly hinder business. But in large assemblies where there is much work to be done, and especially where there is likelihood of trouble, the only safe course is to require a strict observance of the rules."

It seems to me that this might be applicable in your particular situation.  There is no need to be more formal than is necessary to peaceably and amicably accomplish the business of the society.  I do agree with the others, however, that since disagreements do inevitably occur, it is wise for the chair, at least, to have a working knowledge of RONR and to always have a copy available.  RONR In Brief can be very handy in providing guidance on basic procedure, but it is not nearly as helpful as "The Right Book".... RONR... when disputes arise.

Edited November 28, 2018 at 07:03 PM by Richard Brown
Typographical correction

[jstackpo]

Classes, as JK suggested, would be a good opportunity to pass out copies (wrapped up as Christmas presents, of course) of

RONRIB:

"Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised In Brief", Updated Second Edition (Da Capo Press, Perseus Books Group, 2011). It is a splendid summary of all the rules you will ever need in all but the most exceptional situations. And only $7.50! You can read it in an evening. Get both RONRIB and RONR (scroll down) at this link: 

http://www.robertsrules.com/inbrief.html

Or in your local bookstore (with luck -- at least the store could order it for you).