Public correspondence at public meetings

[Guest moore]

If a letter is submitted to a public official for reading at a public meeting and to be made of public record, does that official have to read the correspondence or can it be dismissed and left unread?

The correspondence is factual misconduct of a public/elected official with request for his resignation.

[hmtcastle]

If a letter is submitted to a public official for reading at a public meeting and to be made of public record, does that official have to read the correspondence or can it be dismissed and left unread?

Nothing in RONR requires the reading of correspondence at meetings.

[Guest moore]

Nothing in RONR requires the reading of correspondence at meetings.

Thank you for your help. I guess I will have to find another avenue to get this out to the constituents as public information.

[Rob Elsman]

Nothing in RONR requires the reading of correspondence at meetings.

Well, that's a little too broad a statement for me. For example, if a superior body addresses correspondence to an inferior unit or instrumentality requiring action on the part of the inferior, then the correspondence must be read, and an Objection to the Consideration of the Question that arises out of the correspondence is out of order.

[Guest moore]

Well, that's a little too broad a statement for me. For example, if a superior body addresses correspondence to an inferior unit or instrumentality requiring action on the part of the inferior, then the correspondence must be read, and an Objection to the Consideration of the Question that arises out of the correspondence is out of order.

So is it your position that the Correspondence must be read and there can not be an objection to the request for resignation.?

[Rob Elsman]

So is it your position that the Correspondence must be read and there can not be an objection to the request for resignation.?

I said nothing of the sort.

[Guest moore]

I said nothing of the sort.

Can you please clearify your statement

[Rob Elsman]

Can you please clearify your statement

My earlier reply was made in response to Mr. Mountcastle's assertion that no rule in RONR requires the reading of correspondence. His reply is unqualified and not correct in every instance. The example I gave was one instance where correspondence must be read.

[Guest moore]

My earlier reply was made in response to Mr. Mountcastle's assertion that no rule in RONR requires the reading of correspondence. His reply is unqualified and not correct in every instance. The example I gave was one instance where correspondence must be read.

Thank you and do you have a referance in Roberts Rules for this?

[Rob Elsman]

Thank you and do you have a referance in Roberts Rules for this?

It's not tied up in one tidy paragraph. There is a discussion of motions arising out of reports and communications in RONR (10th ed.), p. 27. The requirement to read documents that come before the assembly for action is discussed on p. 287.

[Rob Elsman]

It's not tied up in one tidy paragraph. There is a discussion of motions arising out of reports and communications in RONR (10th ed.), p. 27. The requirement to read documents that come before the assembly for action is discussed on p. 287.

Oh--and that an Objection to the Consideration of a Question cannot be applied to a communication from a superior body is mentioned briefly on p. 259.

[Guest moore]

Thank you for your help:)

[Josh Martin]

Thank you for your help:)

Well, it shouldn't be of much help as the correspondence you're talking about doesn't seem to be the sort of correspondence Mr. Elsman is talking about.

From the facts provided, it seems to me that there is nothing in RONR which would require the correspondence to be read. The assembly may, if it wishes, order the official to read the correspondence. Additionally, since this is a public body, there may be applicable laws which would have bearing on this situation.