Creation of the Agenda: Who Gets to Add Items?

[Niki Lynn]

Generally speaking, is it proper for one officer to be able to "add" or "assign" topics to another officer's report? As the secretary for our small group (70 total, 40 active members), I have one officer in particular sending a laundry list of topics–encompassing almost every other officer's report–and insisting that they be "put on the agenda where appropriate." I refuse to add any topics to the agenda under an officer's report unless and until that specific officer requests me to do so himself. I have suggested drafting his own list of topics about which he wishes to seek information at the meeting in lieu of dictating others' reports, in the case that the topics aren't reported on through each specific officer's own volition, but he is not "getting the message."

For example, the Training Director might tell me that he has no report, so I slot him for "No Report" under his section of the agenda, and the Events Director might list "Changes in Event Assignments" as the only topic of business she wishes to report on. This other (meddling) officer will send me an email with "Training Director- Recruits' Uniforms, Mentor Meeting, and Training Manual Edits" and "Events Director-Past Events Review, and Need for New Event Protocol" as the topics he has assigned to these other officers' reports. I have tried kindly but directly to inform this other officer that he only needs to send me (in order for me to prepare and pre-distribute the Agenda) the bulletpoints of those topics which *he* intends to cover in his own report–not that of any other officer–yet I still receive the laundry list prior to every board meeting. It is becoming a tense issue and I would like some direction about my stance.

Question: Am I out of line by refusing to add these rogue topic assignments to the Officer Reports, unless requested of me by that specific officer, and by insisting that this other officer only send me the topics on which he wishes to report to the group regarding his own role?

[Joshua Katz]

On 11/16/2021 at 5:05 PM, Niki Lynn said:

Question: Am I out of line by refusing to add these rogue topic assignments to the Officer Reports, unless requested of me by that specific officer, and by insisting that this other officer only send me the topics on which he wishes to report to the group regarding his own role?

I am baffled by a lot of this. The agenda should not list what the reports contain. If an agenda is used at all, it should include the business topics that will be taken up. And while an officer such as the chair or secretary may draft it, that person does not have unilateral control over it, as the agenda must be adopted by the assembly at the meeting, and the assembly may amend it before adopting it.

Much of what you describe sounds like things that don't belong on an agenda at all.

[Guest Zev]

In my opinion secretary Niki Lynn has done the correct thing. Mr. "Meddling's" questions regarding another officer's report can be addressed at the time the report is delivered by way of a Request For Information, just like any other member is allowed to do. So relax and do not forget to inform the presiding officer of these attempts by Mr. "Meddling." And another thing, I would not divide the officer's reports into categories as you have done, but rather call on each officer in the order they are established in the bylaws or in the order in which they were appointed or elected. In this fashion the order is always predictable and the same.

[Richard Brown]

On 11/16/2021 at 4:05 PM, Niki Lynn said:

Question: Am I out of line by refusing to add these rogue topic assignments to the Officer Reports, unless requested of me by that specific officer, and by insisting that this other officer only send me the topics on which he wishes to report to the group regarding his own role?

No, you are not out of line.  But, as others have pointed out, an agenda, if one is used, would normally list the officers who are reporting, but not an itemization of everything that it is expected they will include in their reports.  For example, the agenda would list only "Training Director's Report".  Period.  No itemization of what is expected to be in the report.

[Niki Lynn]

On 11/16/2021 at 7:10 PM, Joshua Katz said:

I am baffled by a lot of this. The agenda should not list what the reports contain. If an agenda is used at all, it should include the business topics that will be taken up. And while an officer such as the chair or secretary may draft it, that person does not have unilateral control over it, as the agenda must be adopted by the assembly at the meeting, and the assembly may amend it before adopting it.

Much of what you describe sounds like things that don't belong on an agenda at all.

The agenda I am describing doesn't contain what the reports contain, but it does give a bulletpoint snapshot. It is provided ahead of time to the membership as a courtesy to give them a head's up about what is to be expected come the meeting. For our board meetings, it plays an important role as well to keep the topics streamlined and accounted for as we move along in discussion. This outline helps everyone prepare how he feels is needed in regards to the planned topics.

It is not required that an agenda is adopted at the beginning of the meeting, and we do not do this.

[Niki Lynn]

On 11/16/2021 at 8:29 PM, Guest Zev said:

In my opinion secretary Niki Lynn has done the correct thing. Mr. "Meddling's" questions regarding another officer's report can be addressed at the time the report is delivered by way of a Request For Information, just like any other member is allowed to do. So relax and do not forget to inform the presiding officer of these attempts by Mr. "Meddling." And another thing, I would not divide the officer's reports into categories as you have done, but rather call on each officer in the order they are established in the bylaws or in the order in which they were appointed or elected. In this fashion the order is always predictable and the same.

The President is the Meddler 😶

The officers do give reports in the same order each time as described in the bylaws. The problem is that the president is attempting to unilaterally control what makes it on to the agenda, in essence forcing officers to report on topics he has not requested be placed on the agenda.

Edited November 17, 2021 at 08:38 PM by Niki Lynn
technical issue

[Niki Lynn]

On 11/17/2021 at 8:31 AM, Richard Brown said:

No, you are not out of line.  But, as others have pointed out, an agenda, if one is used, would normally list the officers who are reporting, but not an itemization of everything that it is expected they will include in their reports.  For example, the agenda would list only "Training Director's Report".  Period.  No itemization of what is expected to be in the report.

I understand this variation to our agenda might be slightly different than others' but to meet the needs of members who need/want to be informed ahead of time what will be discussed (in a general sense, reserving the right that something might change slightly if necessary between issuing the agenda with meeting reminder and the time of the meeting), as well as needing the list-form fashion to help everyone stay on board with keeping the meeting moving along according to plan, adding these bulletpoints accomplishes these goals. The problem is when the aforementioned officer is attempting to dictate the contents of other officers' reports, and I am not sure how to handle this with the authority of RONR behind me.

[Dan Honemann]

What do your bylaws say about this "agenda" you refer to, which you say is not adopted?

[Niki Lynn]

On 11/17/2021 at 2:23 PM, Dan Honemann said:

What do your bylaws say about this "agenda" you refer to, which you say is not adopted?

Our bylaws do speak to an agenda.

ETA: Our bylaws do NOT speak to an agenda.

Edited November 17, 2021 at 08:42 PM by Niki Lynn
typo!

[Dan Honemann]

On 11/17/2021 at 3:37 PM, Niki Lynn said:

Our bylaws do speak to an agenda.

So what, exactly do they say about it?

[Niki Lynn]

On 11/17/2021 at 2:40 PM, Dan Honemann said:

So what, exactly do they say about it?

Sorry, Dan–they do NOT speak to it. 

[Dan Honemann]

On 11/17/2021 at 3:41 PM, Niki Lynn said:

Sorry, Dan–they do NOT speak to it. 

Okay, so then your meetings have no agenda (which is not at all unusual).  This thing you have been referring to as an "agenda" is really something else, and it appears to me to be meaningless as far as the rules in RONR are concerned.  What am I missing?

[Niki Lynn]

On 11/17/2021 at 2:49 PM, Dan Honemann said:

Okay, so then your meetings have no agenda (which is not at all unusual).  This thing you have been referring to as an "agenda" is really something else, and it appears to me to be meaningless as far as the rules in RONR are concerned.  What am I missing?

I am not sure what you mean or what you're missing–we do have an agenda.

[Dan Honemann]

On 11/17/2021 at 3:56 PM, Niki Lynn said:

I am not sure what you mean or what you're missing–we do have an agenda.

No, you do not have an agenda since you say that this thing that you are calling an agenda is not adopted, and there is nothing in your bylaws or special rules of order concerning it.  If your meetings are held at least as frequently as quarterly, and if RONR is your parliamentary authority, then the standard order of business described in RONR (12th ed.) 41:5-27 is the prescribed order of business for your meetings.

[Niki Lynn]

On 11/17/2021 at 3:09 PM, Dan Honemann said:

No, you do not have an agenda since you say that this thing that you are calling an agenda is not adopted, and there is nothing in your bylaws or special rules of order concerning it.  If your meetings are held at least as frequently as quarterly, and if RONR is your parliamentary authority, then the standard order of business described in RONR (12th ed.) 41:5-27 is the prescribed order of business for your meetings.

Correct–that is the order of business that we follow. As I mentioned before, these subdivisions are given a bit of added detail to keep us efficient by listing bulletpoint topics underneath each appropriate section before being disseminated.

Are you simply trying to point out the terminology we are using is incorrect? If so, I am happy to switch out the words "Order of Business" for "Agenda," but even still, I am not sure how to apply your response to potentially remedy the issue I have presented. 

[Dan Honemann]

On 11/17/2021 at 4:18 PM, Niki Lynn said:

Correct–that is the order of business that we follow. As I mentioned before, these subdivisions are given a bit of added detail to keep us efficient by listing bulletpoint topics underneath each appropriate section before being disseminated.

Are you simply trying to point out the terminology we are using is incorrect? If so, I am happy to switch out the words "Order of Business" for "Agenda," but even still, I am not sure how to apply your response to potentially remedy the issue I have presented. 

You can remedy the issue you have presented by no longer distributing this meaningless "agenda" that, based upon everything you have posted so far, you seem to have no authority to distribute.

[Guest Zev]

On 11/17/2021 at 12:02 PM, Niki Lynn said:

The President is the Meddler 😶

Ouch! Now that caught me by surprise!

I have no problem with Mr. H's analysis. However, I understood that the way in which secretary Niki Lynn has been doing things has some basis in the custom that this assembly has been following for some time, and that when she omits the highlights, for a lack of a better term, from the so-called agenda, the assembly members are going to feel a jolt and a certain sense of loss at this event. Perhaps an alternative would be for someone in the assembly to propose a standing rule that the secretary shall prepare a memorandum indicating the various officer's report highlights before every meeting, according to the officer's instructions. In this fashion the assembly would be informed of these highlights and the presiding officer would be prevented from fiddling with it to the annoyance of everyone. I am not wedded to this idea and would take almost any alternative, it is just that I am a little bit worried that the assembly's reaction may be unfavorable if she just eliminates this information without warning. Any thoughts?

[Tom Coronite]

On 11/18/2021 at 1:37 AM, Guest Zev said:

Perhaps an alternative would be for someone in the assembly to propose a standing rule that the secretary shall prepare a memorandum indicating the various officer's report highlights before every meeting, according to the officer's instructions.

Or, maybe the reports themselves should simply present the highlights, and eliminate the extraneous stuff.

I don’t see why members need a heads up as to what items will be in the forthcoming report(s). And as Mr Honemann pointed out, doing so isn’t an agenda anyway. It sounds as if the custom that’s developed (which the OP says helps keeps the meeting moving according to plan) might be because the reports are lengthy and discussions go down rabbit holes. 

[Richard Brown]

On 11/18/2021 at 12:37 AM, Guest Zev said:

Perhaps an alternative would be for someone in the assembly to propose a standing rule that the secretary shall prepare a memorandum indicating the various officer's report highlights before every meeting, according to the officer's instructions.  (Emphasis added)

Adopting a rule to provide for a customized agenda or format for officers' reports is an option, but such a rule should actually be a special rule of order, not a standing rule. 

Per §2:14 of RONR, "The term rules of order refers to written rules of parliamentary procedure formally adopted by an assembly or an organization. Such rules relate to the orderly transaction of business in meetings and to the duties of officers in that connection."  (Emphasis added by me).  That is what such a rule would do in the situation we are discussing.   §2:16 provides that special rules of order supersede any rules in the parliamentary authority with which they may conflict.

Section 2:23 provides that standing rules "are rules that are related to the details of the administration of a society rather than to parliamentary procedure".  They deal with administrative matters, not procedural issues.

I noticed in another recent thread you suggested adopting a standing rule when a special rule of order would actually be the proper way to do it in that situation, too.  You might want to review sections 2:14 - 2:23 regarding special rules of order and standing rules. It can be confusing.

 

[Joshua Katz]

On 11/18/2021 at 12:29 PM, Richard Brown said:

Adopting a rule to provide for a customized agenda or format for officers' reports is an option, but such a rule should actually be a special rule of order, not a standing rule. 

 

I'm not so sure. The proposed rule deals with an action that takes place outside of a meeting, and has nothing to do with the conduct of business at a meeting. I take the second bolded clause to deal with the responsibilities of officers during meetings.

Would you agree it could be done by standing rule if the bullet points or whatever are distributed prior to the meeting?

Actually, looking at what you wrote, we may be disagreeing about what is proposed. 

[Guest Zev]

On 11/18/2021 at 9:29 AM, Richard Brown said:

Adopting a rule to provide for a customized agenda or format for officers' reports is an option, but such a rule should actually be a special rule of order, not a standing rule.

 

On 11/18/2021 at 9:42 AM, Joshua Katz said:

I'm not so sure.

OK guys: I will wait till the dust settles and we decide which option is better.

In the mean time, the thing that interests me is giving secretary Niki Lynn some options on how to proceed and offering the members some relief.

[Dan Honemann]

On 11/18/2021 at 10:17 PM, Guest Zev said:

In the mean time, the thing that interests me is giving secretary Niki Lynn some options on how to proceed and offering the members some relief.

Based solely upon what has been posted, it seems that it is the secretary, not the members, who is seeking relief from the importunities of the president concerning what she should put into this document (incorrectly referred to as an agenda) which she has no obligation at all to produce. If I were she, I'd simply prepare this thing in a fashion which I think will satisfy the members, and ignore the president's demands. 

[Shmuel Gerber]

On 11/19/2021 at 8:21 AM, Dan Honemann said:

… seeking relief from the importunities of the president …

Thanks for sharing that word with us, Dan! Did our late friend Gary Tesser will you his dictionary? 🙂