Guest windyMagician Posted May 30, 2020 at 08:56 PM Report Share Posted May 30, 2020 at 08:56 PM Hello! I hope this question is appropriate to post here. I am a part of a society that is governed first by its own Rules & Procedures and then Robert's Rules of Order. One of the key parts of our R&P is that the Executive Board is able to add "special rules to the agenda pertaining to the structure of debate" to the general meetings. In practice, this is frequently used so that the Executive Board forces the general body to vote for controversial aspects all in a bloc. Is this allowed? My interpretation is that the wording allows for limiting debate but does not allow for voting to be conducted as a bloc, but what is correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted May 30, 2020 at 09:28 PM Report Share Posted May 30, 2020 at 09:28 PM This is clearly a question of interpreting the bylaws, which must be done by the assembly. Arguably, voting of all agenda items at once does have the effect of limiting debate. Arguably, the vote on each item is still needed. It could be reasonably argued either way. If you feel that voting for all items at the same is not authorized in the bylaws, raise a point of order and prepared to appeal an unfavorable position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted May 31, 2020 at 03:45 PM Report Share Posted May 31, 2020 at 03:45 PM Putting the question on a motion regularly forces a single vote on the motion, even if the motion contains multiple "controversial aspects". The ordinary way of obtaining a separate vote on any "controversial aspect" of a motion is to move to Amend the motion by striking out the offending words or paragraphs or by striking out the offending words or paragraphs and adding new words or paragraphs. Personally, I see nothing in the quotation provided that authorizes the Executive Board to interfere with the general rules pertaining to amendments. The scope of the quotation seems to me to be limited to the characteristic of debate. Debate and amendment are two different characteristics of any motion, as is evidenced by Standard Characteristics 5 and 6, RONR (11th Ed.), p. 80. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Lages Posted May 31, 2020 at 06:38 PM Report Share Posted May 31, 2020 at 06:38 PM I don't know where your "Rules & Procedures" fall within the hierarchy of your governing documents, but it seems to me that nothing short of a bylaw-level rule could empower an executive board to set the terms of procedure for a general membership meeting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atul Kapur Posted May 31, 2020 at 08:10 PM Report Share Posted May 31, 2020 at 08:10 PM 3 hours ago, Rob Elsman said: The ordinary way of obtaining a separate vote on any "controversial aspect" of a motion is to move to Amend When the OP said, 22 hours ago, Guest windyMagician said: the Executive Board forces the general body to vote for controversial aspects all in a bloc. the first thing I thought of was to Divide the Question rather than Amend. I guess it depends on the specifics of the motion. It's a matter of interpretation of your R&P as to whether the general meeting has to accept the decision of the Executive Board or whether the meeting can overrule them. In other words, whether the special rules which the Executive Board adds can be amended or suspended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted May 31, 2020 at 10:10 PM Report Share Posted May 31, 2020 at 10:10 PM Provided the text of the motion is divisible within the rules, a motion to Divide the Question is also a possibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted May 31, 2020 at 10:55 PM Report Share Posted May 31, 2020 at 10:55 PM On 5/30/2020 at 3:56 PM, Guest windyMagician said: In practice, this is frequently used so that the Executive Board forces the general body to vote for controversial aspects all in a bloc. Is this allowed? My interpretation is that the wording allows for limiting debate but does not allow for voting to be conducted as a bloc, but what is correct? (Emphasis added) Guest WindyMagician, this sounds somewhat like a "consent calendar" or "consent agenda", in which several separate motions are voted on all at once usually without debate. However, with such a consent calendar, the motions on it are supposed to be routine and non-controversial, such as approving the minutes, etc. If any member objects to something on the consent agenda, that item is supposed to be removed from the consent agenda and placed on the agenda where it would be if not for the consent agenda. It is then treated just like all other motions to be introduced, debated, voted on, etc. Is that is happening? If so, you should be able to get any controversial items removed from the consent agenda with a simple request or objection. See page 361 of RONR for more information or ask one of us to copy and paste the text for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts