a dark and stormy night

[Mr. J!]

It is a dark and stormy night on the second Tuesday of September. Very bad weather, in fact, at the time for the regular meeting of the _____ Society, whose bylaws are unimaginatively the ones starting on page 565.

The society is evenly divided on an item of business which was debated to death before the summer recess. The members from the central city strongly favor it; those from rural areas are dead set against it. The deadline for a decision is nigh.

It is now meeting time, but a quorum is not present. The president sees this, so waits. As more members trickle in, the rural members who came early notice the late arrivals are all city folk. They realize the rest of the rural residents are staying home because of the storm. If a quorum of fifteen members is reached, it will be overwhelmingly urban, but right at this moment a bare majority of those present are rural.

Without being recognized, Mrs. Rustic rises and moves to adjourn. Mr. Rustic shouts "second." The president refuses to hear them.

What recourse do the Rustics have?

[hmtcastle]

Without being recognized, Mrs. Rustic rises and moves to adjourn. Mr. Rustic shouts "second." The president refuses to hear them.

As I understand it, the meeting was never called to order. In that case, a motion to adjourn seems a tad premature.

That said, I'm uncomfortable with the idea that the chair could hold the meeting hostage by simply waiting to call it to order. I think that decision rests with assembly.

[Mr. J!]

As I understand it, the meeting was never called to order. In that case, a motion to adjourn seems a tad premature.

That said, I'm uncomfortable with the idea that the chair could hold the meeting hostage by simply waiting to call it to order. I think that decision rests with assembly.

The meeting has not been called to order; the early-arriving Rustics have always been a tad hasty. However, if they wait, they fear city folk will be in the majority. Can they call the meeting to order? Can they legitimately demand the president do so?

[hmtcastle]

Can they call the meeting to order? Can they legitimately demand the president do so?

I think so. At some point the president is failing in his responsibility to preside. He can't wait an unreasonably long time and it seems me that it has to be up to the assembly to determine what's reasonable.

But stay tuned for responses from those who subscribe to the "unitary executive theory".

[David A Foulkes]

Didn't we give this zebra a good whacking all ready? Or is there something different enough about this one?

[hmtcastle]

Didn't we give this zebra a good whacking all ready? Or is there something different enough about this one?

Perhaps the excitable Mr. J! is testing the consistency of the respondents.

[George Mervosh]

Perhaps the excitable Mr. J! is testing the consistency of the respondents.

No he's been a regular respondent (and a consistent one) for years, but I'm missing something, I fear.

[David A Foulkes]

Perhaps the excitable Mr. J! is testing the consistency of the respondents.

Like the many variations on a similar-themed question on those psychological tests they give you when you apply for a security guard position at a Nuke Plant? (didn't get it, btw)

[hmtcastle]

No he's been a regular respondent (and a consistent one) for years,

But, in this case, he's asking the question and we're the respondents.

[Mr. J!]

No he's been a regular respondent (and a consistent one) for years, but I'm missing something, I fear.

Perhaps Mr. J! is missing something, but he is not being intentionally vexatious.

The question is an attempt to understand how the members of an inquorate not-yet-called-to-order meeting can decide, collectively, how long they will wait. Obviously, this is a constructed situation, but there are real world ones where waiting or not is important.

[David A Foulkes]

Perhaps Mr. J! is missing something, but he is not being intentionally vexatious.

The question is an attempt to understand how the members of an inquorate not-yet-called-to-order meeting can decide, collectively, how long they will wait. Obviously, this is a constructed situation, but there are real world ones where waiting or not is important.

RONR 10th Ed. p. 338 ll. 1-4 says if a quorum is not present (at the scheduled time of the meeting) the Chair "waits until there is one", and continues "or until, after a reasonable time, there appears to be no prospect that a quorum will assemble."

That pesky "reasonable" rears it's ugly head again here. IMHO I would venture that, as a group and before the Chair calls the meeting to order, what might work is a quick informal discussion based around "So, how long should we wait?" If those in attendance (collectively and by what seems to be a majority I suppose) decide to give it another 15 minutes, then after 15 minutes I would think the meeting should be called to order inquorate and a motion to adjourn to a later time be made. Of course, anyone who wanted to leave could do so, but with at least the understanding that the meeting might in fact be called to order and be quorate. Given that knowledge in advance of departure, I would question if their rights (as absentees) would be violated, but I have no initials after my name, so a grain of salt is on the menu.

[George Mervosh]

Perhaps Mr. J! is missing something, but he is not being intentionally vexatious.

The question is an attempt to understand how the members of an inquorate not-yet-called-to-order meeting can decide, collectively, how long they will wait. Obviously, this is a constructed situation, but there are real world ones where waiting or not is important.

Why do they need to decide collectively?

At the appointed time, if the presiding officer refuses to call the meeting to order I'd suggest any member could properly call it to order, then proceed according to the rules in RONR.

[David A Foulkes]

Why do they need to decide collectively?

At the appointed time, if the presiding officer refuses to call the meeting to order I'd suggest any member could properly call it to order, then proceed according to the rules in RONR.

Well, per the citation I provided above, RONR does seem to empower the Chair with a certain amount of authoritative latitude in this regard, at least until an unreasonable amount of time has passed.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

RONR 10th Ed. p. 338 ll. 1-4 says if a quorum is not present (at the scheduled time of the meeting) the Chair "waits until there is one", and continues "or until, after a reasonable time, there appears to be no prospect that a quorum will assemble."

That pesky "reasonable" rears it's ugly head again here.

I agree.

It's all relative.

For a annual convention of, say, five days, for the convention's first day to be delayed by one hour or two hours is entirely possible, and "reasonable" to wait for. A 10:00 a.m. start time might be delayed due to airline flights being knowingly delayed by bad weather or a labor strike (or an Jet Blue airline male flight attendant to go mad and slide down the emergency chute).

For a Kiwanis or Lions or Optimist club, who meets for one hour, 12:00 to 1:00 p.m. for lunch, a half hour wait is way, way too long to sit and twiddle one's civic thumbs.

[David A Foulkes]

For a Kiwanis or Lions or Optimist club, who meets for one hour, 12:00 to 1:00 p.m. for lunch, a half hour wait is way, way too long to sit and twiddle one's civic thumbs.

Of course, if the bar at the Holiday Inn is open that early.................

[Chris Harrison]

Well, per the citation I provided above, RONR does seem to empower the Chair with a certain amount of authoritative latitude in this regard, at least until an unreasonable amount of time has passed.

Then what happens when a member decides that an unreasonable time has passed and calls the meeting to order? Can the Chair object that a unreasonable time has not passed and how do the members decide who is right (especially when there is no quorum present)?

[Josh Martin]

Why do they need to decide collectively?

At the appointed time, if the presiding officer refuses to call the meeting to order I'd suggest any member could properly call it to order, then proceed according to the rules in RONR.

I agree with Mr. Mervosh. After the meeting has been called to order, if the assembly wishes to wait longer, the assembly can adopt a motion to recess or to take measures to obtain a quorum. If the assembly wants to go home, the assembly can adopt a motion to adjourn (with or without setting an adjourned meeting). With the meeting underway, there will now be rules in place for the assembly to make decisions.

[David A Foulkes]

I agree with Mr. Mervosh. After the meeting has been called to order, if the assembly wishes to wait longer, the assembly can adopt a motion to recess or to take measures to obtain a quorum. If the assembly wants to go home, the assembly can adopt a motion to adjourn (with or without setting an adjourned meeting). With the meeting underway, there will now be rules in place for the assembly to make decisions.

A. Meeting called for 7:30, no quorum yet. After an informal discussion, a "majority" feel it's appropriate to wait 15 more minutes for the known stragglers to arrive. Some decide not to wait. By 7:45 a quorum is attained, the meeting is called to order, and on they go.

B. Meeting called for 7:30, no quorum yet. Meeting called to order, motion to recess for 15 minutes is adopted, though a minority votes against it. Meeting is recessed until 7:45. Some decide not to wait. By 7:45 a quorum is attained, the meeting is called back to order, and on they go.

Essentially the same result comes of both approaches. But I can see that Plan B is "official", parliamentary procedure having been followed. And thus, those who have left, however, cannot claim their rights as absentees have been violated, as they left a legitimately called, and recessed, meeting. Correct?

Perhaps the citation I quoted will find its way out of the RONR 11 then. Or not.

[hmtcastle]

Perhaps the citation I quoted will find its way out of the RONR 11 then.

I'm pretty certain that, if it already found it's way into the 11th edition, it's staying there.

[Dan Honemann]

I'm pretty certain that, if it already found it's way into the 11th edition, it's staying there.

That's a reasonable assumption.