"Good of the Order"

[Guest Hugh]

My organization customarily includes an agenda item at all official meetings entitled "Good of the (organization's name)" as the final order of business prior to adjournment. No debate is permitted, no motions are accepted and no action for or against can be taken.   Is this an acceptable procedure? If so, once all other agenda items have been tended to and the group enters into discussion of the "Good of the Order," can the group move to return to normal business to act on a subject not previously presented?

 

 

[Josh Martin]

On 12/12/2022 at 4:18 PM, Guest Hugh said:

My organization customarily includes an agenda item at all official meetings entitled "Good of the (organization's name)" as the final order of business prior to adjournment. No debate is permitted, no motions are accepted and no action for or against can be taken.   Is this an acceptable procedure?

Yes. Such a procedure is not unusual.

"This heading, included by some types of societies in their order of business, refers to the general welfare of the organization, and may vary in character. Under this heading (in contrast to the general parliamentary rule that allows discussion only with reference to a pending motion), members who obtain the floor commonly are permitted to offer informal observations regarding the work of the organization, the public reputation of the society or its membership, or the like. Certain types of announcements may tend to fall here. Although the Good of the Order often involves no business or motions, the practice of some organizations would place motions or resolutions relating to formal disciplinary procedures for offenses outside a meeting (63) at this point. In some organizations, the program (see below) is looked upon as a part of the Good of the Order." RONR (12th ed.) 41:34

On 12/12/2022 at 4:18 PM, Guest Hugh said:

If so, once all other agenda items have been tended to and the group enters into discussion of the "Good of the Order," can the group move to return to normal business to act on a subject not previously presented?

Yes, the assembly may Suspend the Rules in order to do so, which requires a 2/3 vote for adoption.

[Richard Brown]

On 12/12/2022 at 6:13 PM, Josh Martin said:

the assembly may Suspend the Rules in order to do so, which requires a 2/3 vote for adoption.

I agree that "returning to normal business" might require a suspension of the rules, but where does RONR say that conducting business or adopting motions is not permitted in "Good of the Order"?  The statement in RONR that "Although the Good of the Order often involves no business or motions . . . ." indicates that motions MAY be adopted and business MAY be conducted while in "Good of the Order".   I don't believe a suspension of the rules would be required unless the assembly is going back to a different part of the agenda or order of business and I don't believe that it is necessarily required to go back to an earlier point in the agenda in order to make, consider, or adopt a motion.

Whether it would be preferable to go back to an earlier point in the order of business is a different question.  I just don't think it is absolutely necessary.

[Josh Martin]

On 12/13/2022 at 1:48 PM, Richard Brown said:

I agree that "returning to normal business" might require a suspension of the rules, but where does RONR say that conducting business or adopting motions is not permitted in "Good of the Order"?  The statement in RONR that "Although the Good of the Order often involves no business or motions . . . ." indicates that motions MAY be adopted and business MAY be conducted while in "Good of the Order".   I don't believe a suspension of the rules would be required unless the assembly is going back to a different part of the agenda or order of business and I don't believe that it is necessarily required to go back to an earlier point in the agenda in order to make, consider, or adopt a motion.

Whether it would be preferable to go back to an earlier point in the order of business is a different question.  I just don't think it is absolutely necessary.

In my view, 41:34 neither explicitly permits nor prohibits the conduct of business in "Good of the Order," but instead suggests that such matters vary depending upon the rules or customs of a particular assembly.

We are told, however, that in this assembly, under Good of the Order, "No debate is permitted, no motions are accepted and no action for or against can be taken." Assuming this is an accurate and complete summary of the organization's rules and customs on this matter, I still believe it is correct that in this assembly, a suspension of the rules is required in order to conduct business in Good of the Order or, in the alternative, return to a different heading in the order of business.

I suppose, however, if it is only a custom and not a special rule of order, only a majority vote would be required to set the custom aside.

Certainly, the rules or customs in a different assembly in regard to Good of the Order may well be different.

Edited December 13, 2022 at 10:04 PM by Josh Martin

[Lord Madrona]

On 12/12/2022 at 2:18 PM, Guest Hugh said:

My organization customarily includes an agenda item at all official meetings entitled "Good of the (organization's name)" as the final order of business prior to adjournment. No debate is permitted, no motions are accepted and no action for or against can be taken.   Is this an acceptable procedure? If so, once all other agenda items have been tended to and the group enters into discussion of the "Good of the Order," can the group move to return to normal business to act on a subject not previously presented?

Our organization follows a similar custom and the officers of the assembly try to curb comments and feedback from the membership to just that: comments. Since the voices come from the membership community, often what some of us members will do is distill some of the comments/concerns/feedback into actionable questions and then present them as motions in the following meeting. 

In my humble opinion, in the ideal world, the board members would take note of any substantive and actionable comments/concerns/feedback from the membership during the Good of the Order and then prepare new motions for consideration if they were aligned with the "[B]est interests of the corporation" per our bylaws. By substantive I mean items of real value or concern to the corporation. For example, we had a member "comment" that some of the community maintenance staff were hanging out and smoking on properties that were not occupied during the weekdays without permission. 

Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the members to know how and where to communicate their feedback to the board in order to get the best results for everyone. We find that the majority of our community members shy away from parliamentary procedure and just save their comments for the Good of the Order where they are part of the crowd and not so much an individual, hoping to invoke the change they desire. 

This may work for you as well unless your organization's rules or applicable law provide otherwise.

Edited March 15, 2023 at 10:13 PM by Lord Madrona
Horrendous grammar and spelling errors