Rule of :unanimous consent

[L. Thorson]

It has been a practice of the board to suspend the rules to permit non-members of the board to address the board on certain agenda items. This is done under the "unanimous consent" provision as contained in RONR p. 52-53. When there are several non-board members that desire to be heard, does the presiding officer have to ask for unanimous consent for each non-board member desiring to speak? Is it in order for the presiding officer to ask unanimous consent for all non-board members desiring to speak? Is the "unanimous consent" revocable, i.e. can a director subsequently offer an "objection" to continuation of remarks by a non-board member thereby requiring a motion and vote for continuance by the speaker? Bottom line: If a director does not object to "unanimous consent" request by the presiding officer, has he subsequently forefeited his right to thereafter voice an "objection"?

[jstackpo]

Bottom answer: No.

The book isn't explicit (I think) but one would think that permissions to speak would be granted individually to each speaker, unless there is no objection to a blanket permission.

However, technically, revoking such a permission (individual or blanket) would seem to be a use of Rescind Something Previously Adopted which a majority of all the board members can adopt - or 2/3 of those voting. Any member could move to rescind the permission.

[David A Foulkes]

Bottom answer: No.

The book isn't explicit (I think) but one would think that permissions to speak would be granted individually to each speaker, unless there is no objection to a blanket permission.

I know it's in the book (I'm pretty sure I've even read the section) but can't seem to pinpoint the page. Any help?

[Kim Goldsworthy]

It has been a practice of the board to suspend the rules to permit non-members of the board to address the board on certain agenda items.

This is done under the "unanimous consent" provision as contained in RONR p. 52-53.

When there are several non-board members that desire to be heard, does the presiding officer have to ask for unanimous consent for each non-board member desiring to speak?

Short of a motion granting blanket permission for all nonmembers, the answer is "Yes." - Each individual is treated individually. The board may wish to hear from serious, more senior, non-members, and not hear from little-known, unrespected non-members.

As I said, a motion could be made to accomplish the end, "Let's let all these guys speak, for today."

Is it in order for the presiding officer to ask unanimous consent for all non-board members desiring to speak?

See my answer above.

Yes, it is in order for the chair to attempt to cut to the chase, and achieve blanket coverage.

Is the "unanimous consent" revocable, i.e. can a director subsequently offer an "objection" to continuation of remarks by a non-board member thereby requiring a motion and vote for continuance by the speaker?

Yes.

The "permission" can be withdrawn.

At any time. "Wham!"

Bottom line: If a director does not object to "unanimous consent" request by the presiding officer, has he subsequently forefeited his right to thereafter voice an "objection"?

No.

For example: After a half hour of letting the nonmembers ramble and ramble, it would be in order to make a motion to achieve the net effect of, "We've given them half an hour to speak; they've had their say; let's get back on track. Back to normal, please."

[Guest Nancy N.]

I know it's in the book (I'm pretty sure I've even read the section) but can't seem to pinpoint the page. Any help?

I think David is looking for the footnote on p. 255.

I see no statement in the book prohibiting the suspension to name Nonmembers Alpha, Beta, Iota, and Epsilon as allowed to speak, implicitly excluding Nonmembers Gamma, Delta, and the rest of them feshuggener Greeks.

[David A Foulkes]

I think David is looking for the footnote on p. 255.

Yup, thanks!