Calling the Roll

[David A Foulkes]

Previous "custom" has been not to call the roll at meetings. If we were to add that to our order of business ( the "standard" per RONR, and not defined in bylaws or anywhere else) I see that as being a Special Rule of Order, as it deals with (as I understand it) parliamentary procedure.

Question of placement: better to put in bylaws, or include in the collection of Special Rules of Order?

As rules of order in the bylaws are suspendable by the same threshold (2/3 vote) as in the Special Rules of Order, the only difference I can think of is the requirement for amending bylaws vs special rules. But I quite likely am overlooking something. The view from out on the limb gets a little shaky the farther out I go.

[Tim Wynn]

Previous "custom" has been not to call the roll at meetings. If we were to add that to our order of business ( the "standard" per RONR, and not defined in bylaws or anywhere else) I see that as being a Special Rule of Order, as it deals with (as I understand it) parliamentary procedure.

Question of placement: better to put in bylaws, or include in the collection of Special Rules of Order?

As rules of order in the bylaws are suspendable by the same threshold (2/3 vote) as in the Special Rules of Order, the only difference I can think of is the requirement for amending bylaws vs special rules. But I quite likely am overlooking something. The view from out on the limb gets a little shaky the farther out I go.

349, l. 12-33.

[Trina]

349, l. 12-33.

ll. 30-31 mentions a 'special rule' if the (optional) roll call is to be done at a different time, rather than at the end of the 'opening ceremonies'... but does that answer David's question as to how (bylaw or special rule of order) the society would best specify that a roll call should be done at its meetings (rather than being optional)? Well, anyway, that's what I thought David's question was...

[George Mervosh]

ll. 30-31 mentions a 'special rule' if the (optional) roll call is to be done at a different time, rather than at the end of the 'opening ceremonies'... but does that answer David's question as to how (bylaw or special rule of order) the society would best specify that a roll call should be done at its meetings (rather than being optional)? Well, anyway, that's what I thought David's question was...

Absent an order of business already being laid out in David's bylaws, a special rule of order will cut it and IMO is preferable.

I'll add that it's inadvisable to do it all unless the society has attendence requirements that need documented.

[hmtcastle]

I'll add that it's inadvisable to do it at all unless the society has attendance requirements that need to be documented.

And it opens the whole can of worms as to what constitutes "attendance".

[George Mervosh]

And it opens the whole can of worms as to what constitutes "attendance".

If they have the requirement they'll figure it out. That isn't what this thread is about though.

[hmtcastle]

That isn't what this thread is about though.

Nor was it about the advisability of such a rule.

Threads have a way of unraveling . . .

[Tim Wynn]

ll. 30-31 mentions a 'special rule' if the (optional) roll call is to be done at a different time, rather than at the end of the 'opening ceremonies'... but does that answer David's question as to how (bylaw or special rule of order) the society would best specify that a roll call should be done at its meetings (rather than being optional)? Well, anyway, that's what I thought David's question was...

If David's organization were adopting its own order of business, that would be a special rule of order... which it is less desirable to place in the bylaws. See p. 16, l. 32 - p. 17, l. 4.

However, David isn't talking about a new order of business, since the roll call is included as an option in the standard order of business prescribed in RONR.

I'm not convinced that instituting a roll-call policy in this manner would require a special rule of order. It seems more like a standing rule in this context. As you noted, absent a special rule, it already has a place in the standard order of business.

[Rob Elsman]

Absent an order of business already being laid out in David's bylaws, a special rule of order will cut it and IMO is preferable.

I'll add that it's inadvisable to do it all unless the society has attendence requirements that need documented.

I agree with Mr. Mervosh. See RONR (10th ed.), pp. 16, 17.

[David A Foulkes]

Thanks all.

My sense of it is this: The "standard" (default, whatever) order of business as laid out in RONR would apply in any organization that did not define that in their documents. Assuming RONR is the parliamentary authority stated in the bylaws, the rules of procedure contained in RONR govern at meetings where bylaws or other rules are not contradictory. So our organization would not need to officially adopt the RONR order of business, because it already applies via our parliamentary authority.

The Roll Call, noted as an optional section, and in a manner implying (somewhat) that these options are sometimes adopted the society (being optional and all), would then need to be something more explicitly stated somewhere other than RONR, that being either bylaws or Special Rules of Order.

Now, as Mr. Wynn noted, " ....., absent a special rule, it already has a place in the standard order of business." But is it really in the standard order of business, being as it's optional?

George - We do have attendance requirements, and thus the consideration of including the roll call. But absent that requirement, why would you consider it a bad idea?

Mr. Mountcastle - please pass the can opener?

(ps. sans livre today, so I can't review cited pages, should some of these answers be there. I'll check them later. Regrets)

[George Mervosh]

George - We do have attendance requirements, and thus the consideration of including the roll call. But absent that requirement, why would you consider it a bad idea?

Sans attendance requirements, it serves no procedural purpose.

[David A Foulkes]

Sans attendance requirements, it serves no procedural purpose.

So mostly it's just an annoying waste of everybody's time.

[Rob Elsman]

Thanks all.

My sense of it is this: The "standard" (default, whatever) order of business as laid out in RONR would apply in any organization that did not define that in their documents. Assuming RONR is the parliamentary authority stated in the bylaws, the rules of procedure contained in RONR govern at meetings where bylaws or other rules are not contradictory. So our organization would not need to officially adopt the RONR order of business, because it already applies via our parliamentary authority.

The Roll Call, noted as an optional section, and in a manner implying (somewhat) that these options are sometimes adopted the society (being optional and all), would then need to be something more explicitly stated somewhere other than RONR, that being either bylaws or Special Rules of Order.

Now, as Mr. Wynn noted, " ....., absent a special rule, it already has a place in the standard order of business." But is it really in the standard order of business, being as it's optional?

George - We do have attendance requirements, and thus the consideration of including the roll call. But absent that requirement, why would you consider it a bad idea?

Mr. Mountcastle - please pass the can opener?

(ps. sans livre today, so I can't review cited pages, should some of these answers be there. I'll check them later. Regrets)

It is only the six headings on p. 342 that are binding under the rule of RONR (10th ed.), p. 342, ll. 6-11, 20-23.

[George Mervosh]

Sans attendance requirements, it serves no procedural purpose.

So mostly it's just an annoying waste of everybody's time.

Yup.

[Josh Martin]

As rules of order in the bylaws are suspendable by the same threshold (2/3 vote) as in the Special Rules of Order, the only difference I can think of is the requirement for amending bylaws vs special rules. But I quite likely am overlooking something. The view from out on the limb gets a little shaky the farther out I go.

Generally speaking, it's advisable not to put something in the Bylaws unless you have to or the society believes it to be such an important rule that it should be highly resistant to change. It seems to me a special rule of order would be just fine for this rule, although I agree that it serves no useful purpose unless the assembly has attendance requirements.

[Shmuel Gerber]

Now, as Mr. Wynn noted, " ....., absent a special rule, it already has a place in the standard order of business." But is it really in the standard order of business, being as it's optional?

Yes, it's there, but it's optional.