Multiple policy’s lumped in one agenda item

[Guest Ryan]

At school board meeting, the board was introduced to the first reading of policy changes handed down from state department of education. The president put all the policy’s under one new business item and pushed them through to second reading without discussion of individual policy changes. Shouldn’t each policy change have its own new business item for discussion and voting on each policy change?

[Dan Honemann]

On 10/28/2021 at 1:38 AM, Guest Ryan said:

At school board meeting, the board was introduced to the first reading of policy changes handed down from state department of education. The president put all the policy’s under one new business item and pushed them through to second reading without discussion of individual policy changes. Shouldn’t each policy change have its own new business item for discussion and voting on each policy change?

The answer to your question may depend upon the nature of these policy changes and their relationship to, or dependency upon, each other. 

Take a look at Section 27 of RONR, 12th ed., (on pages 255-260), and then come back if you haven't found the answer.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 10/28/2021 at 1:38 AM, Guest Ryan said:

At school board meeting, the board was introduced to the first reading of policy changes handed down from state department of education. The president put all the policy’s under one new business item and pushed them through to second reading without discussion of individual policy changes. Shouldn’t each policy change have its own new business item for discussion and voting on each policy change?

Well, assuming these were "handed down" by a higher authority, it may be that the board had no options but to adopt them as their own policies.  If that's the case, it could be argued that there would be no point in lengthy discussion.

[Guest Ryan]

Gary,

they were handed down but it’s up to each board to approve them. Most changes are replacing shall with must, but there are a couple other changes. One has to do with the board being able to set compensation for itself and the other has to do with gender. I believe those specifically need to be discussed individually. 

[Dan Honemann]

On 10/29/2021 at 10:12 AM, Guest Ryan said:

Gary,

they were handed down but it’s up to each board to approve them. Most changes are replacing shall with must, but there are a couple other changes. One has to do with the board being able to set compensation for itself and the other has to do with gender. I believe those specifically need to be discussed individually. 

If the rules in RONR control, it would appear that these changes that you mention would have to receive separate consideration if you request (demand) that it be done (see 27:10 in that Section in RONR that I suggested you read).

[Gary Novosielski]

On 10/29/2021 at 10:12 AM, Guest Ryan said:

Gary,

they were handed down but it’s up to each board to approve them. Most changes are replacing shall with must, but there are a couple other changes. One has to do with the board being able to set compensation for itself and the other has to do with gender. I believe those specifically need to be discussed individually. 

Then you are free to demand a division of the question.  That's why the rule exists.