Suspension of rules to allow non-member to address the group

[Guest Allen Barrett]

A person meets all the requirements to be on the agenda to address the Board. They are listed on the posted agenda

but then are told a vote to suspend the rules must be taken and passed by a 2/3 majority in order for them to actually address the Board.

Where can this rule be found in Robert's Rules Of Order 10th edition. This is the edition that is being used as the authority.

[J. J.]

A person meets all the requirements to be on the agenda to address the Board. They are listed on the posted agenda

but then are told a vote to suspend the rules must be taken and passed by a 2/3 majority in order for them to actually address the Board.

Where can this rule be found in Robert's Rules Of Order 10th edition. This is the edition that is being used as the authority.

The board would adopt the agenda, and could decide not include the non member speaker by majority vote (p. 360).

[Kim Goldsworthy]

A person meets all the requirements to be on the agenda to address the Board.

They are listed on the posted agenda but then are told a vote to suspend the rules must be taken and passed by a 2/3 majority in order for them to actually address the Board.

Where can this rule be found in Robert's Rules Of Order 10th edition.

Wait a minute.

Do not confuse one thing with another.

It does not take a 2/3 vote merely to put someone on the agenda, and to hear from this person.

(You would not require a 2/3 vote to hear an estimate from your repair service man; likewise for your local mayor to present an award to your organization. They are on the agenda already, and there is NO MOTION PENDING when they are speaking.)

It WOULD take a 2/3 vote to allow nonmember to debate a pending motion.

Debate is a right of membership.

Being asked to speak (or being allowed to speak) on a new topic, with nothing debatable currently on the floor, is not the same thing as exercising a right of membership.

[Josh Martin]

A person meets all the requirements to be on the agenda to address the Board. They are listed on the posted agenda

but then are told a vote to suspend the rules must be taken and passed by a 2/3 majority in order for them to actually address the Board.

Where can this rule be found in Robert's Rules Of Order 10th edition. This is the edition that is being used as the authority.

A suspension of the rules would only be required to allow the member to speak in debate on a pending motion. (RONR, 10th ed., pg. 255, footnote) A majority vote would be sufficient to allow the member to speak while no motion is pending. I would also note that the "posted agenda" is not binding until it is actually adopted by the board, and could be amended by majority vote while it is pending. (FAQ #14)

Since you say this person "meets all the requirements to be on the agenda to address the Board," however, this suggests to me that either some customized rule of the assembly or applicable law is at work here, since there are no such requirements in RONR. You may wish to look to the relevant rule or law to see if it has anything to say on the matter, as it would supersede RONR.