Voting on Consent Agenda Items

[JTW]

There are four resolutions on an agenda. Normally, board members can remove resolutions from the consent agenda for separate vote and discussion. The board attorney has just told the board that to save time, the board can approve the consent agenda containing all resolutions, then when voting, simply state which resolutions each member is voting Yes, No, or Abstaining from.

Example:

After a motion has been approved for the consent agenda of four Resolutions, and after discussion, the roll call vote commenced like this:

Board Member 1: "I vote Yes on Resolutions One, Two and Three and Abstain from Resolution Four".

Board Member 2: "I vote Yes to all items."

Board Member 3: I vote No to Resolution One and vote Yes for Resolutions Two, Three and Four."

 

Forum Question 1: Is this allowed?

Forum Question 2: If so, where in RONR does it state that this is allowed?

Forum Question 3: If not allowed,  can Board Rules be changed to allow this type of voting?

 

Note: I've never heard of this before. I would appreciate some opinions or clarity. Thank you.

Edited May 11, 2023 at 05:50 AM by JTW

[Gary Novosielski]

Let me guess: nobody objected, or raised a point of order, or even a parliamentary inquiry?

The problem here, of course, is that by doing it this way, there is no opportunity for debate on the questions, as there would be if proper procedure were followed.

Debate on a debatable motion cannot properly be prevented except by a motion for the Previous Question or by a motion to Suspend the Rules, which in either case would require a two-thirds vote.

I'll leave it to others to opine on whether a special rule of order could be adopted to allow it, but as the right to participate in debate is a fundamental right of membership, I'd certainly oppose it if I were a member or, if this were a public body, if I were a constituent.  If there is no debate, this is in no sense a deliberative assembly.  

How much time does this save, anyway?

Edited May 11, 2023 at 03:41 AM by Gary Novosielski

[Guest JTW]

On 5/10/2023 at 11:39 PM, Gary Novosielski said:

How much time does this save, anyway?

Believe me, it saves only a few minutes at most.

[JTW]

On 5/10/2023 at 11:39 PM, Gary Novosielski said:

The problem here, of course, is that by doing it this way, there is no opportunity for debate on the questions, as there would be if proper procedure were followed.

Debate on a debatable motion cannot properly be prevented except by a motion for the Previous Question or by a motion to Suspend the Rules, which in either case would require a two-thirds vote.

Debate did occur. But it was so strange operating the meeting this way even though I did my best.

I objected and stated that I had never seen this in RONR during our closed meeting portion of the school board meeting. But there is so much going on always, that I didn't even bother to object publicly on this issue.

[Rob Elsman]

Without relevant special rules of order, there is neither a consent calendar nor any special way of handling routine or uncontroversial items of business. Whatever is the answer to the question will be found in those rules.

[puzzling]

On 5/11/2023 at 3:33 AM, JTW said:

There are four resolutions on an agenda. Normally, board members can remove resolutions from the consent agenda for separate vote and discussion. The board attorney has just told the board that to save time, the board can approve the consent agenda containing all resolutions, then when voting, simply state which resolutions each member is voting Yes, No, or Abstaining from.

Example:

After a motion has been approved for the consent agenda of four Resolutions, and after discussion, the roll call vote commenced like this:

Board Member 1: "I vote Yes on Resolutions One, Two and Three and Abstain from Resolution Four".

Board Member 2: "I vote Yes to all items."

Board Member 3: I vote No to Resolution One and vote Yes for Resolutions Two, Three and Four."

 

Forum Question 1: Is this allowed?

Forum Question 2: If so, where in RONR does it state that this is allowed?

Forum Question 3: If not allowed,  can Board Rules be changed to allow this type of voting?

 

Note: I've never heard of this before. I would appreciate some opinions or clarity. Thank you.

Find it very strange and i do not think it will not save  any time.

The problem is in the first step

" a motion has been approved for the consent agenda of four Resolutions"

This is a debatable motion and can go into the subject matter of each resolution? Can even lead to amendment of some of the resolutions?

So instead of debating each resolution in turn (if debate is wanted by some member) you do them all at the same time. (chaos anyone?)

Consent agenda's are for motions that no member objects to (or wants to amend) 

I think that you could save time with a special rule of order (or bylaw clause) that if no member wants to remove a motion from the agenda , all motions on the (remaining) agenda are approved (similar to the procedure for minutes approval) but that is all.

[JTW]

On 5/11/2023 at 8:00 AM, puzzling said:

Consent agenda's are for motions that no member objects to (or wants to amend) 

I think that you could save time with a special rule of order (or bylaw clause) that if no member wants to remove a motion from the agenda , all motions on the (remaining) agenda are approved (similar to the procedure for minutes approval) but that is all.

This is how it has always been done in the past. So this action occuring at the latest meeting all of a sudden is really puzzling and confusing.

[Richard Brown]

The proposal by the board attorney is silly. The board should follow the procedure in RONR for a consent calendar as set out in section 41:32. 

[JTW]

On 5/11/2023 at 8:12 AM, Richard Brown said:

The proposal by the board attorney is silly. The board should follow the procedure in RONR for a consent calendar as set out in section 41:32. 

Thank you. Because it was very confusing. But after reading section 41:32, is the attorney's suggestion allowed?

Edited May 11, 2023 at 12:42 PM by JTW

[Josh Martin]

On 5/10/2023 at 9:33 PM, JTW said:

Forum Question 1: Is this allowed?

Robert's Rules does not permit voting in this manner.

I have seen some assemblies which use a consent agenda vote in this manner, but that is due to their own rules, not RONR. (Although my experience has been that the clerks don't care for this practice much, since it makes their jobs more difficult.)

On 5/10/2023 at 9:33 PM, JTW said:

Forum Question 2: If so, where in RONR does it state that this is allowed?

Nowhere.

Indeed, strictly speaking, RONR really does not permit a "consent agenda" at all, and an organization which uses such a device is supposed to adopt its own rules on the subject. So ultimately the answer to your question should be found in the board's rules.

On 5/10/2023 at 9:33 PM, JTW said:

Forum Question 3: If not allowed,  can Board Rules be changed to allow this type of voting?

Yes. Such a rule would be a special rule of order. It requires a 2/3 vote for its adoption.

On 5/10/2023 at 10:39 PM, Gary Novosielski said:

I'll leave it to others to opine on whether a special rule of order could be adopted to allow it, but as the right to participate in debate is a fundamental right of membership, I'd certainly oppose it if I were a member or, if this were a public body, if I were a constituent.  If there is no debate, this is in no sense a deliberative assembly.  

I see no reason why a special rule of order could not be adopted for this purpose, although I am in agreement that such a rule is not ideal.

On 5/11/2023 at 12:46 AM, JTW said:

Debate did occur. But it was so strange operating the meeting this way even though I did my best.

The understanding in RONR of how a consent agenda (called a "consent calendar" in RONR) is supposed to work is that it consists of the items for which there is no objection, debate, or amendment. If it is desired for a member to vote against an item, speak in debate on it, or propose an amendment or some other motion, the item is "pulled" from the consent agenda by request of a member, and that item is then subject to separate consideration after completion of the consent agenda. Debating and voting on everything all at once is likely to lead to confusion.

On 5/11/2023 at 7:40 AM, JTW said:

Thank you. Because it was very confusing. But after reading section 41:32, is the attorney's suggestion allowed?

The procedure described is not permissible under the rules in RONR. But strictly speaking, a consent agenda should not be used at all unless the assembly has adopted special rules of order providing for one, and the consent agenda would then be governed by those rules. The board could adopt rules providing for the procedure you describe, if it wishes, but I do not find it advisable.

Edited May 11, 2023 at 01:14 PM by Josh Martin

[JTW]

On 5/11/2023 at 9:14 AM, Josh Martin said:

The procedure described is not permissible under the rules in RONR. But strictly speaking, a consent agenda should not be used at all unless the assembly has adopted special rules of order providing for one, and the consent agenda would then be governed by those rules. The board could adopt rules providing for the procedure you describe, if it wishes, but I do not find it advisable.

Thank you for that very detailed explanation, Josh. Thank you to everyone.

I welcome more input....

[puzzling]

Still a bit puzzling why a vote is needed on the consent calender (after only motions remains,were all members consent to)

[Josh Martin]

On 5/11/2023 at 12:31 PM, puzzling said:

Still a bit puzzling why a vote is needed on the consent calender (after only motions remains,were all members consent to)

First, I would again repeat that if an organization is to use a consent calendar (or consent agenda, as it is more commonly known), the body is supposed to adopt its own rules governing its use. So whether a vote is needed, or whether the chair can simply declare the remaining items approved by unanimous consent (in a manner similar to corrections to the minutes, for example) will be governed by those rules.

Second, I would note that the assemblies which most commonly use consent agendas are public bodies, and that appears to be the case here. Quite frequently, a formal vote (and perhaps even a roll call vote) on the consent agenda will be required by the rules or customs of the body and/or by applicable law, even although one would imagine that, if the recommended procedures for a consent agenda are followed, such a vote will presumably be unanimous. If it is desired to eliminate taking a vote on the consent agenda, it would be prudent for the OP to consult the board's clerks and attorneys on that question before proceeding with that plan.

Edited May 11, 2023 at 05:48 PM by Josh Martin