Who determines when to use rules for small boards?

[Tomm]

Does the chair alone determine this or is it a vote and determined by the entire board?

 Once determine does it carry over to future meetings?

[George Mervosh]

On 12/15/2022 at 12:12 PM, Tomm said:

Does the chair alone determine this or is it a vote and determined by the entire board?

 Once determine does it carry over to future meetings?

The board itself decides this and it applies until they rescind such a decision.

[Alicia Percell, PRP]

Is it in fact a "small board" as defined in RONR (not more than about a dozen board members present)?  Or is this a group which isn't actually a small board that wants to use the small board rules anyway?

If it's in fact a small board, I'm not seeing in RONR (12th ed.) 49:21 that a vote is required, and grade-school math would decide (underline added):

"Procedure in Small Boards. In a board meeting where there are not more than about a dozen members present, some of the formality that is necessary in a large assembly would hinder business. The rules governing such meetings are different from the rules that hold in other assemblies, in the following respects: [...]"

Perhaps there might be some disagreement regarding whether 16 members present is "about a dozen" and in such a case I can see a unanimous consent situation, or a ruling of the chair and possible vote on an appeal of the ruling being needed to interpret that.  But if there are fewer than 12 members present, it seems RONR makes the rules different without a need for a vote.  RONR is usually more precise than "about a dozen" so I presume the less precise phrase was purposefully chosen to give a little flexibility for the group to decide how to proceed if it's close to, but mathematically larger than, 12?

If it's clearly not a small board, then you'd need a special rule of order to use the small board board rules.

[Tomm]

On 12/16/2022 at 9:27 PM, Alicia Percell, PRP said:

But if there are fewer than 12 members present, it seems RONR makes the rules different without a need for a vote. 

Without a vote and/or documented special rule then how do you maintain any consistency in the use of those rules regarding debate or whether or not the chair votes, etc. from one meeting to the next?

[Alicia Percell, PRP]

Presuming it's clearly a "small board" then those ARE consistently the rules from one meeting to the next.

[Tomm]

On 12/16/2022 at 9:46 PM, Alicia Percell, PRP said:

Presuming it's clearly a "small board" then those ARE consistently the rules from one meeting to the next.

So you're saying then that RONR mandates small boards to always use the rules for small boards?

[Alicia Percell, PRP]

What else do you imagine when it says, "The rules governing such meetings are different...?"

[Tomm]

On 12/16/2022 at 10:08 PM, Alicia Percell, PRP said:

What else do you imagine when it says, "The rules governing such meetings are different...?"

It just doesn't seem to enforce the use in small boards in a more assertive manner similar to that 50:25 does for committees, but I acknowledge your point. It's just that I'm use to seeing our board flip back and forth to where sometimes the chair votes and sometimes not, along with sometimes participating in debate. Nothing seems to have enforced any type of consistency. Our problem to address. 

[Atul Kapur]

On 12/16/2022 at 11:46 PM, Alicia Percell, PRP said:

Presuming it's clearly a "small board" then those ARE consistently the rules from one meeting to the next.

I recall other threads on this forum that point out that the provision is

On 12/16/2022 at 11:27 PM, Alicia Percell, PRP said:

In a board meeting where there are not more than about a dozen members present

[emphasis added], so that it is not necessarily consistent for the same board, depending on how many members are actually present at any particular meeting. So a board of 20 may operate differently in a meeting where there is one absentee compared to a meeting where there are eight.

[Alicia Percell, PRP]

Yep, it definitely says, "present."  We never got clarity on the count or hints that the question in his mind involved varying attendance in this particular situation, just a question which stipulates that it is a small board and then asks procedure based on that premise.  But it's a good idea to highlight that.

Given this phrasing, a board could at one month's meeting be a not-small board but at the next month's meeting be a small board, depending on how many showed up.  As you note, if attendance fluctuates above and below "about a dozen" there could be inconsistency.  If there is consistency in whether it is a small board (maybe it only has 7 members), the rules would be consistent.

[Josh Martin]

On 12/16/2022 at 10:38 PM, Tomm said:

Without a vote and/or documented special rule then how do you maintain any consistency in the use of those rules regarding debate or whether or not the chair votes, etc. from one meeting to the next?

One imagines that the members of the board have some memory of what occurred at previous meetings. RONR refers to this as a "custom." See RONR (12th ed.) 2:25.

If the board wishes to formally vote to adopt a motion specifying that the board shall use the small board rules (or some portion thereof), for the sake of clarity, the board is free to do so.

On 12/16/2022 at 10:49 PM, Tomm said:

So you're saying then that RONR mandates small boards to always use the rules for small boards?

On 12/16/2022 at 11:08 PM, Alicia Percell, PRP said:

What else do you imagine when it says, "The rules governing such meetings are different...?"

I would not go so far as to say that RONR mandates a board with twelve or fewer members to use the small board rules. A small board may, but is not required to, use some or all of the small board rules. A board has greater flexibility in this matter than a committee. The manner in which a board makes this decision may vary from board to board. It might be formally adopted as a rule, but more frequently I imagine it will be governed by custom.

I would say that I would assume, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, that a board which generally has 12 or fewer members present (and especially a board with 12 or fewer members in total) would be presumed to use the small board rules, but "mandates" is too strong of a word.

On 12/16/2022 at 11:23 PM, Tomm said:

It just doesn't seem to enforce the use in small boards in a more assertive manner similar to that 50:25 does for committees, but I acknowledge your point.

I agree.

On 12/16/2022 at 11:23 PM, Tomm said:

It's just that I'm use to seeing our board flip back and forth to where sometimes the chair votes and sometimes not, along with sometimes participating in debate. Nothing seems to have enforced any type of consistency. Our problem to address. 

Then for your board, it may well be desirable for the board to formally adopt something on this matter.

I would also note that for the two rules you mention, there could always be some variation in that regard, since no one is required to speak in debate or to vote. So even in the event the board follows the small board rules on these matters, the chair might choose not to vote or choose not to speak in debate simply because he does not wish to.

On 12/17/2022 at 12:47 AM, Alicia Percell, PRP said:

Yep, it definitely says, "present."  We never got clarity on the count or hints that the question in his mind involved varying attendance in this particular situation, just a question which stipulates that it is a small board and then asks procedure based on that premise.  But it's a good idea to highlight that.

From Tomm's previous questions, my recollection is that the board has nine members in total, so I think there is no doubt that it is a "small board" in the sense that term is used in RONR, even if all members are present.

Edited December 17, 2022 at 12:39 PM by Josh Martin

[Rob Elsman]

Agreeing with Mr. Mervosh, the board itself has authority to decide the question if the general membership assembly has not already done so.

[Richard Brown]

On 12/17/2022 at 10:59 AM, Rob Elsman said:

Agreeing with Mr. Mervosh, the board itself has authority to decide the question if the general membership assembly has not already done so.

I agree, but only to a point (or maybe with a caveat):  Yes, the board absolutely can decide by the adoption of a special rule of order whether and to what extent it will follow the small board rules unless the membership has already done so.  HOWEVER, I agree with Ms. Percell that RONR seems very clear in 49:21 that the small board rules DO APPLY to small boards where there are not more than about a dozen members in attendance unless the board or the membership has adopted a contrary rule.

On 12/17/2022 at 6:33 AM, Josh Martin said:

I would not go so far as to say that RONR mandates a board with twelve or fewer members to use the small board rules. A small board may, but is not required to, use some or all of the small board rules. A board has greater flexibility in this matter than a committee. The manner in which a board makes this decision may vary from board to board. It might be formally adopted as a rule, but more frequently I imagine it will be governed by custom.

I would say that I would assume, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, that a board which generally has 12 or fewer members present (and especially a board with 12 or fewer members in total) would be presumed to use the small board rules, but "mandates" is too strong of a word.

I respectfully disagree. . .  or at least remain unconvinced.  Here, we appear to have a board of nine members, so if that is true there will always be less than a dozen members at its meetings.  It seems to me that RONR 49:21 does mandate that such a board use the small board rules unless the board or the membership adopts a special rule of order to the contrary or the board suspends the rules at a particular meeting so as not to utilize all or a part of the small board rules at that particular meeting or for the consideration of a particular motion.  Note:  if you think the word "mandates" is too strong, then how about "requires"?    The language in 49:21 providing for the use of the small board rules in small boards is more than a suggestion and is actually a rule.  So, it seems the word "mandates" as used by Ms. Percell actually is appropriate.  That "mandate" can always be superseded by the adoption of a special rule of order or by suspending the rules.

For the benefit of those without a copy of RONR (and those who don't want to bother to look it up), here is the pertinent text from §46:21 of RONR (12th ed.):  "Procedure in Small Boards. In a board meeting where there are not more than about a dozen members present, some of the formality that is necessary in a large assembly would hinder business. The rules governing such meetings are different from the rules that hold in other assemblies, in the following respects:" (Emphasis added).  The section goes on to describe certain procedures applicable in small boards.

So, it seems to me it IS the rule in RONR that the small board rules automatically apply to a small board of only nine members where there are never more than about a dozen members present unless the board or the membership adopts a special rule of order to the contrary.

I agree that the situation is less clear with a board that does come closer to the "not more than about a dozen members present" provision of 49:21 or that frequently exceeds it.  Where that is the case, I believe it would be prudent for the board to adopt a special rule of order as to whether and to what extent it will follow the small board rules.

 

 

[Dan Honemann]

RONR is intentionally vague when it uses the term "not more than about a dozen members present", and although what is said regarding "small board rules" has undergone a number of changes since 1923, I think that what General Robert said in Parliamentary Law on page 251 remains true today. There he tells us that "How far the formalities of ordinary assemblies may be dispensed with to advantage is a question to be decided by the board or the executive committee itself."

I agree with Mr. Martin when he says that:

"A small board may, but is not required to, use some or all of the small board rules. A board has greater flexibility in this matter than a committee. The manner in which a board makes this decision may vary from board to board. It might be formally adopted as a rule, but more frequently I imagine it will be governed by custom."

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

I agree with Ms. Percell as well.  If it is optional it could have said that.  It can be changed through adoption of a special rule of order.  A small board I used to be on in my state did precisely that with regards to seconds.  IMHO, a small board that is existentially (no matter if there are absences, below 12) is under small board rules unless they adopt a special rule of order to the contrary.  (Hi Alicia, long time no talk)