How binding is an Agenda

[Tomm]

I understand that an Agenda can be amended both prior to approval by majority vote or 2/3 vote after its initial approval, but just how binding is an Agenda if items normal to RORN "order of business" are not listed on the Agenda, like New Business"

The Boards lack of understanding seems to think, and runs the meetings as if, the Agenda is an open and closed document and once you run down thru the issues listed the meeting is over??? 

Is New Business inherently allowed if RONR is the parliamentary authority without having to amend the Agenda and all other listed items have been addressed?

Please advise!

[Richard Brown]

1 hour ago, Tomm said:

Is New Business inherently allowed if RONR is the parliamentary authority without having to amend the Agenda and all other listed items have been addressed?

In my opinion, yes.  RONR is clear that new business may be introduced in the portion of the standard order of business for new business or after all other business on the agenda has been completed unless the society has adopted a bylaw or special rule of order specifically prohibiting the introduction of items which are no on the agenda.  Some organizations do have such a rule.  However, as a practical matter, a member wishing  to introduce an item of new business which is not on the agenda must hustle and obtain the floor to make his motion before the chair declares the meeting adjourned.

[Tomm]

14 minutes ago, Richard Brown said:

RONR is clear that new business may be introduced in the portion of the standard order of business for new business or after all other business on the agenda has been completed

Is there actual text that would show New Business is inherent whether or not it was listed on the agenda?

[Atul Kapur]

Could you please explain the difference between this discussion and this thread which you also started?

[Tomm]

The previous thread never seems to specifically address my initial concern which is, can New Business be offered without having to amend the agenda if it's not specifically listed on the agenda?

I see searching the Web that some, who I assume are not associated with RONR, actually recommend not listing what the refer too as "AOB" (Any Other Business) because it can be disruptive!?!? But I also understand, from responses on my other thread, New Business or AOB would have to be specifically documented as not being permitted with a Special Rule of Order otherwise normal RONR must allow New Business?   

[Richard Brown]

 

33 minutes ago, Atul Kapur said:

Could you please explain the difference between this discussion and this thread which you also started?

He also  started a thread on a very similar topic about a year ago about agendas which got into a lot of detail and conflicting opinions with both Mr. Honemann and Mr. Gerber weighing in as to when introduction of new business can be prohibited.

https://robertsrules.forumflash.com/topic/35590-to-be-or-not-to-be-an-agenda/

 

[Joshua Katz]

13 minutes ago, Tomm said:

The previous thread never seems to specifically address my initial concern which is, can New Business be offered without having to amend the agenda if it's not specifically listed on the agenda?

 

I think the problem is that this is a fluffier question than you would like it to be. I think Mr. Martin and Mr. Brown gave answers in the last thread that covered the subject. 

As for my view, I think it's important to get clear on agendas and orders of business. The order of business in RONR is not analogous to an agenda. An agenda lists general and special orders. As you know, those topics appear in the order of business. But the difference is that the agenda says what they are, while the order of business says when to take them up. The two, as I see them, are complementary. Which is why I agree, as Mr. Martin said, that even though the agenda may not call for new business, new business may be offered after the agenda has been completed, so long as you can do so before the chair declares the meeting adjourned. New business, in fact, in my opinion, does not belong on an agenda, because it is an order of business heading, not an agenda item. But it is the case that an adopted agenda allows the chair to, once it is completed, declare the meeting adjourned, because it is presumptively all the business to be conducted. Thus, the better course is to amend the agenda to include the item of business - especially if you think it is important enough to not be pushed to last place.

[Tomm]

As you may know this whole question was based on the fact that I found out a new Board member wanted to make a motion and was waiting for New Business which never came because New Business wasn't a listing on the agenda.

Maybe the best question to ask would be is, what or how would you recommend I advise the new board member on his options for the next board meeting? Should he attempt to amend the agenda during the initial approval process or should he make his motion during the "Board Comments" section listed at the end of the agenda. And what counter arguments can he use if the Chair refuses to allow him to offer his motion? Can he or should he use the reasoning that neither the Bylaws nor any Special Rules of Order prevent him from instituting new business, therefore RONR allows him to introduce the New Business once all the agenda items have been satisfied? 

As Parliamentarian's what would you recommend to this new board member? 

[Josh Martin]

13 hours ago, Tomm said:

As you may know this whole question was based on the fact that I found out a new Board member wanted to make a motion and was waiting for New Business which never came because New Business wasn't a listing on the agenda.

One problem I see with this thread is that it left out the fact that the organization has adopted its own rules which may be relevant to this question.

For the benefit of those who do not wish to jump between threads, the relevant portion of the rule reads as follows:

"At least seven (7) days prior to all Board meetings, excluding Executive and Special Sessions, an agenda, subject to amendment, shall be posted in XXXX Facilities and/or on the XXXX website. Motions made in Board meetings, excluding Executive and Special Sessions, shall be read and passed a minimum of three times before finalized and acted upon unless readings are waived by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of the Board (6)."

13 hours ago, Tomm said:

Maybe the best question to ask would be is, what or how would you recommend I advise the new board member on his options for the next board meeting? Should he attempt to amend the agenda during the initial approval process or should he make his motion during the "Board Comments" section listed at the end of the agenda.

I would advise the member to first attempt to work with whoever prepares the agenda to get the motion on the agenda in the first place.

Failing that, I would advise the member to attempt to amend the agenda during the initial approval process. Even if these attempts are not strictly required, they seem like good ideas. Just because a member theoretically can make a motion during New Business with absolutely zero notice doesn't mean this is the most advisable course of action, particularly if the assembly is highly resistant to this idea.

Failing that, I suppose attempting to make the motion during (or immediately following) the "Board Comments" section seems reasonable.

13 hours ago, Tomm said:

And what counter arguments can he use if the Chair refuses to allow him to offer his motion? Can he or should he use the reasoning that neither the Bylaws nor any Special Rules of Order prevent him from instituting new business, therefore RONR allows him to introduce the New Business once all the agenda items have been satisfied? 

As Parliamentarian's what would you recommend to this new board member? 

If the chair rules the motion out of order, the member should raise an Appeal. Assuming the Appeal is seconded, I suppose I would make arguments such as the following. I feel on very firm ground here for the arguments regarding amending the agenda and the arguments regarding RONR for making a motion not listed on the agenda. For the arguments regarding the association's bylaws for making a motion not listed on the agenda, I think this is one reasonable interpretation, but not the only one.

Amending the Agenda: "The bylaws explicitly provide that the agenda is subject to amendment."

Making a Motion Not Listed on the Agenda: "No rule in RONR prohibits the introduction of motions not listed on an adopted agenda. The purpose of an agenda under RONR is not to limit what business may be conducted, but to ensure that the most important business is conducted first. Members are free to introduce items of business not listed on the agenda after all business on the agenda has been completed, unless the organization's rules provide otherwise.

In my view, our rules on this subject do not provide otherwise. While the rules do provide that an agenda must be submitted seven days prior to a meeting, the rules specifically provide that this agenda is subject to amendment. As a result, this rule provides no notice requirement for members. The rule does not explicitly provide that items which are not listed on the agenda may not be considered. In the absence of such an explicit prohibition, my view is that the rule in RONR is controlling.

Furthermore, our bylaws already require extensive previous notice for members by providing that 'Motions made in Board meetings, excluding Executive and Special Sessions, shall be read and passed a minimum of three times before finalized and acted upon unless readings are waived by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of the Board (6).' As a result, there is no violation of the rights of members if the assembly permits the introduction of a motion at this time, because the motion will still need to be considered at two additional meetings before it is finalized and acted upon. I think it is unreasonable to interpret the rule regarding the agenda as an additional requirement of previous notice. Rather, I view the agenda provided to members in advance of the meeting as a courtesy to members, not as a limitation on the business which may be conducted at the meeting."

Edited May 31, 2021 at 01:11 PM by Josh Martin

[Tomm]

Thank you all for your great advise, as well as your patients and tolerance of my questions. 

This forum is a godsend for me. Someone who finds parliamentary procedure exciting and desperately tries to understand RONR and all its intricacies, which apars I never will. Lol!

[Guest Sandra L]

Can a Disciplinary action against a member be considered under new business w/o the person knowing a discipline action is happening against them?

[Richard Brown]

Guest Sandra, please post your question by starting a new topic.  The forum works best that way. Although your topic concerns new business, it is different from the current topic and is best posted as a new topic.