National Parliamentarian
FEATURES
Volume 75, No. 1 | First Quarter 2014
Can Creativity Be Taught? — p. 7 Growing NAP Internationally — p. 15 Explaining and Defusing Tense Parliamentary Situations — p. 17
Education and Credentialing Committee Members of the committee pose with 2011-2013 President Maurice S. Henderson and Executive Director Mike Chamberlain. Pictured left to right: Jim Jones, Jim Stewart, Ann Guiberson, Maurice S. Henderson, Ann Rempel, Wanda Davis, Mike Chamberlain, Dr. M. Eugene Bierbaum, Dan Seabold
Leadership Conference Attendees participate in group exercises, led by Freddie Colston and Deborah Underwood.
Treasurer Evan Lemoine Evan is in his second consecutive term as treasurer and is seen here presenting the treasurer’s report.
National Parliamentarian Volume 75, No. 1 | First Quarter 2014
Contents 3 President’s Message 5 From the Editor
News and Information from NAP 9 Ordering Materials From NAP 10 Parliamentary Language
14 Quick Quiz 22 Words From the Pros 28 Mystery Motion 30 Two Minutes of Procedure 31 Motion Spotlight 32 Parliamentary Myths 33 In Memory 36 Answer Key
Articles and Features 7 Can Creativity be Taught? Dave Mezerra, PRP 11 The ASSURE Model for Teaching Cynthia Mayo, PRP 15 Growing NAP Internationally Karen Watson, PRP 17 Explaining and Defusing Tense Parliamentary Situations Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP 21 Call for Nominations for the 2014 NAP Educational Foundation Trustee Sandy Olson, PRP 25 Unit Spotlight 37 Questions and Answers (1–5)
National Parliamentarian®
Official publication of the National Association of Parliamentarians® 213 South Main Street • Independence, MO 64050-3808 Phone 816.833.3892 (Toll-free 888.627.2929) • Fax 816.833.3893 E-mail: hq@nap2.org • Web: http://parliamentarians.org
2011–2013 National Officers President Vice-President Secretary Treasurer Directors-at-Large
Ann Guiberson, PRP Mary L. Randolph, PRP Ann L. Rempel, PRP Evan A. Lemoine, PRP Steve Glanstein, PRP James N. Jones, PRP Jim Stewart, PRP
Editor
Tim Wynn, PRP P.O. Box 54 Lake Helen, FL 32744 NPeditor@PerfectRules.com
Assistant Editor
District Director Representatives Denise Irminger, PRP Daniel Ivey-Soto, PRP
Parliamentarian Leonard M. Young, PRP Executive Director Mike Chamberlain, PRP
NP Submission Guidelines National Parliamentarian generally publishes only original works that have not been published elsewhere. Articles will be edited to conform to The Chicago Manual of Style (16th ed.) and may be edited for content and length. Article text should be submitted on CD or via e-mail attachment in Microsoft Word or RTF format. Illustrations, photographic prints and high quality digital photos are welcome. Materials submitted cannot be returned unless special arrangements are made in advance with the editor. Contributors must submit an “assignment and transfer of copyright” form granting to NAP copyright in the work or the right to publish it.
Submission Deadlines Second Quarter 2014 Third Quarter 2014 Fourth Quarter 2014 First Quarter 2015
March June September December
1, 1, 1, 1,
2014 2014 2014 2014
Carol A. Henselder, PRP
Parliamentary Review Committee
John Rempel, PRP, Chairman Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP Sharon Reed, PRP
National Parliamentarian
Registered U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, ISSN 8755-7592. Published quarterly by the National Association of Parliamentarians. ©2013. All rights to reproduce or reprint any portion of this publication are reserved, except by written permission of the editor. Opinions expressed herein are not necessarily endorsed by NAP. First publication, January 1938. Subscription and change-of-address requests should be directed to NAP headquarters at the address above.
Subscription rates: $30/year or single copy $8.
NAP’s Vision: To provide parliamentary leadership to the world
President’s Message Create the Future
Ann Guiberson, PRP Have you ever thought it might be fun to predict the future? Do you realize that in some ways, you already do know what’s going to happen? For example, you know that tomorrow daylight will follow night; in the fall colorful leaves will appear, and even though you’re freezing today, spring will come with its new birth and warmer days. In another sense you do have the ability to influence and even determine outcomes in your life through the goals you set and determination you have to carry out those goals. This past biennium the board of directors adopted a new strategic plan. In this biennium it is time for us to start bringing this future from paper into reality by implementing the plan. Here are some steps we will take to move forward into the future: Education: First and foremost our focus is on education. NAP’s reason for being is to study, teach, and promote parliamentary procedure. NAP must deliver on the promise of affordable, accessible education programs and services. The business plan calls for developing the body of knowledge that includes all those skills, competencies, and abilities necessary to be successful in learning and applying parlia-
mentary procedure. It goes beyond book knowledge and encompasses the many disciplines in which that book knowledge may be applied. This is a long- Ann Guiberson, PRP term objective NAP President that will result in pathways of learning and milestones of achievement available to all members. In the short term, NAP will deliver more education electronically with regularly scheduled webinars, professional certifying courses, and leadership training for those who are unable to attend in person. The credentialing program, especially the recertifying course, is a major point of pain. NAP must address this problem now. We can do this by creating modules which focus on education rather than testing. I am happy to say that by March 2014, NAP will offer these courses in classroom and online settings. The professional courses must be made available more often and more cost effectively. The “old” testing format must give way to a “new” diagnostic demonstration of skill in which the participant receives guidance for improvement if necessary. Coupled with mentoring programs, we can have an interesting program in which no one will have to lose his credential.
First Quarter 2014
3
President’s Message (continued from previous page)
Membership: In 2013 we had a wakeup call. Renewal and retention rates were not where they should be. It’s time for us all to realize membership marketing is everybody’s job,
members and more registered parliamentarians doesn’t make the pie smaller for anyone. Making the pie bigger creates more buzz, more people to spread the word, and more knowledge of the organization. Right now NAP must deliver on the promise we have huge areas in of affordable, accessible education most states where there are no parliamentarians programs and services. at all. NAP just doesn’t appear very important not just the district directors and if we’re nowhere. Parliamentarians not just the membership chairmen need to be everywhere. in the associations. We simply can’t Financial Stability: Finally, afford rules that drive people away NAP’s financial stability is a major or seem designed to keep people key to accomplishing these goals. out. I believe we have to rethink We cannot provide great education, the membership exam to make it great resources, and the service more inviting and friendly. Barriers members deserve without adequate to membership should be removed, financial resources to operate and but even more, the value of NAP to fund initiatives that will carry membership must be clearly articu- NAP to its highest and best future. lated, consistent, and delivered in a NAP must operate in a business-like professional manner. Public Relations: What We simply can’t afford rules is it going to take for NAP to be able to be successful in that drive people away or seem getting the word spread to designed to keep people out. more and more people and organizations? And, by the way, do it on a shoestring budget? manner and yet balance that with NAP has already moved forward by the highest level of quality service to having a redesigned website. We members. also have to leverage social media We have already adopted the much more than we have been. proration of dues. Now you can The best public relations we bring in new members all year long can have, however, is by making and know that they will not face an our circle bigger. Having more unfair dues burden when they join. 4
National Parliamentarian
We will explore other avenues to create additional nondues revenue streams as well. From grants, to online programs, to new educational materials—NAP must develop a realistic strategy for how to expand the planned giving program and the fundraising programs. I believe we have a strong leadership team and NAP has a
wealth of wonderful members who are eager to move forward. Our strategic plan is now the driving force for agendas, board meetings, and must become the focus of successive administrations as well. That’s the way to become powerful. That’s the way to achieve positive accomplishments. That’s the way we will create the future.
From the Editor As the new editor of the National Parliamentarian (NP), I would like to take a moment to introduce myself and to thank the support staff that brings this publication together. But I’ll start by describing a little bit of what’s in store for the next two years. In this biennium, NP will continue to focus on education and development. The goal is to provide a Tim Wynn, PRP publication that engages professional, intermediate, and novice parliamentarians. Whether or not you realize it, if you’re taking an active interest in parliamentary procedure, you’re a parliamentarian. And it is the mission of this publication to assist you in being the best parliamentarian you can be. Whenever possible, NP will include real-world advice from a wide range of professional parliamentarians who serve in many different fields of parliamentary law. Now, let me circle back around to that introduction. I am president of Perfect Rules Inc., a parliamentary consulting company that I founded along with my brother, Todd. Through this company, we serve clients nationwide, and it is my extreme pleasure to serve as your editor. First Quarter 2014
5
From the Editor (continued from previous page)
NP relies on the talent of NAP members who generously donate articles of interest and insight. The publication receives news, information, and support from the efficient staff at NAP Headquarters. And many thanks must be given to the Parliamentary Research Committee, which handles the Q&A feature. Finally, I would like to thank the NP Review Committee and Assistant Editor Carol A. Henselder.
New Registered Parliamentarians! NP congratulates the following individuals for attaining the status of Registered Parliamentarian:
Wesley Waddle, Kentucky Carol Johnson Davis, Georgia Dr. R. Richard Tribble, Jr., Illinois Leonora Branca, California
NP Review Committee
John Rempel, MD, PRP
6
Sharon Reed, PRP
National Parliamentarian
Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP
Can Creativity Be Taught? Dave Mezerra, PRP As the story goes, an experienced parliamentarian was having dinner at home and said to his wife, “Your homemade biscuits are good, but maybe they could be improved with a little shortening.” To this his wife replied, “And so could your longwinded classes on Robert’s Rules of Order!”
Dave Mezerra, PRP
(previous question), the intricacies of incidental motions (objection to consideration), or the proper language of a presiding officer (“It is moved and seconded…”). With no interaction sought, no practical assistance on running better meetings, and nothing but a “…you are the average of the technical lecture, is it any five people you spend the most wonder that nonaficionados can feel turned off time with…” by Robert and his many rules? sessions mainly involve PowerPoint Alexis Ohanian (a tech entreslide after PowerPoint slide, reading preneur) has hypothesized that aloud sections of RONR, reading the best way to be creative is to verbatim from a handout, or just surround yourself with creative lectures and more lectures—did you people. In his article “How do ever stop to think about the impact you stay creative?” (Spirit Magaon the students? I offer that the one zine, November 2013) he posits word a parliamentary teacher must that you are the average of the five continuously keep in mind is the people you spend the most time word creativity. with, and goes on to make the folPut yourself in the shoes of a lis- lowing recommendation: “Surround tener brand new to the complexities yourself with people who are doing of parliamentary procedure who interesting things, who are thinking hears a presenter talk and talk and interesting thoughts, who challenge talk about the history of Robert’s you to be better, who come from Rules, about the use of Latin (pro a diverse set of backgrounds and extempore) and parliamentary terms periences.” Many of us are aficionados of Robert’s Rules and are extremely knowledgeable as we teach classes on meeting-management skills, bylaw revisions, officer roles, writing minutes, motions and their uses, etc., etc. But—if those instructional
First Quarter 2014
7
Can Creativity be Taught? (continued from previous page)
So surround yourself with creative individuals—both parliamentarians and non—and surround yourself with creative input. At conventions and national training conferences, attend workshops presented by other parliamentarians.
Parliamentary BINGO or Jeopardy! to enliven our Q&A sessions. Those are a good start. But why not try to adapt other word games or manipulatives to engage your participants? Board games and parlor games such as Charades, Apples to Apples, HedBanz, Name 5 Game, Urban Myth, Trivial Pursuit … always be on the lookout or Catchphrase could each be customized to for creative styles or gimmicks to fit a parliamentary topic. enhance your presentations. They can be a teaching tool and get the students involved in the learning Ask permission to “steal” approach- process without them even realizing es and ideas from your peers (with that they are sitting through a lesproper credit). Every time you see a son. Make it fun for them. They’ll unique television commercial, every stay in tune much more and not time you read a fun Sunday comic doze during a lecture. strip, every time you play a game, Alexis Ohanian further file away an idea that might lead to a exemplifies in his article that new and different approach to a par- combining input and observations liamentary lesson. Here’s a case in from all around you, along with point: the magazine article above! your own personal “you,” is the As a teacher of parliamentary perfect breeding ground for great classes, always be on the lookout for creative styles or gimmicks to enhance Board games and parlor games … your presentations. Abhor could each be customized to fit straight lecture style. Don’t just rely on Q&A a parliamentary topic. to involve the audience. Determine long before the presentation how to make the task ideas. The better you understand fun and not a bore. Easier said than that your students are grasping done? the subject being taught through a We’ve all probably thought about variety of learning modes (auditory, (or even tried) using such games as visual and kinesthetic), the better 8
National Parliamentarian
you’ll be able to make the message meaningful and easy to assimilate. Don’t just talk … don’t just have the students read … get them involved in the process. And how do you do that? Be creative! Use simulations. Involve the students in dialogues. Play board games or word games. Have the students create their own
questions. Have the students act out roles. Work in pairs or small groups. Try magic tricks. Wave red flags. Assign treasure hunt challenges in RONR. Use manipulatives. Challenge the students. Get them physically involved. Give them rewards. Be creative and have fun doing it. They’ll love you for it!
Ordering Materials from NAP Five ways to order: 1) By Mail: 213 South Main Street Independence, MO 64050-3808 2) By Phone: (888) 627-2929 3) By Fax: (816) 833-3893 4) By E-mail: HQ@nap2.org 5) On the Web: http://parliamentarians.org
Categories of Materials Available Include: Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised 11th Edition Materials
Parliamentary Reference Cards
Other Parliamentary Manuals
Pathways to Proficiency
Eletronic Resources
References
Meeting Resources
Parliamentary Supplies
Leadership Spotlights
Teaching Resources
Parliamentary Study
Resource descriptions and a complete order form are available at the NAP Online Store: http://parliamentarians.org/store/newstore.php
First Quarter 2014
9
Parliamentary Language The world of parliamentary law has its own precise and unique language. Mastering this language is an important step in gaining a fuller understanding of proper procedure.
Point of What! In meetings all across this planet, you’re likely to hear members calling for different points: Point of Privilege; Point of Parliamentary Procedure; Point of Order; Point of Information; Point of Personal Inquiry. Since RONR (11th ed.) converted “Point of Information” to “Request for Information,” there is only one Point* in the book, now. That is a Point of Order. So, if you’re not making a Point of Order (i.e. pointing out a violation of the rules), put your pointer away, because you’re probably Requesting, Inquiring, or Rising. Motion: Point of Order
Purpose: A member points out a violation of the rules. Proper Wording to Use: Point of Order!
Motion: Parliamentary Inquiry Purpose: A member asks the chair a pertinent question on parliamentary procedure. Proper Wording to Use: I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. Motion: Request for Information Purpose: A member requests information relevant to the business at hand but not related to parliamentary procedure. Proper Wording to Use: I have a request* for information. Motion: Raise a Question of Privilege Purpose: A member introduces an urgent request or main motion related to the rights of the assembly or any its members. Proper Wording to Use: I rise to a question of privilege. *Point of Information is still acceptable, though it is no longer the preferred term. 10
National Parliamentarian
The Assure Model for Teaching Leadership Development Cynthia Mayo, PRP When teaching parliamentary procedure, an interactive process is needed in order to assure that participants can apply what has been taught. One method is to use the ASSURE Model, a model that is currently used to create interactive learning experiences for online teaching. The ASSURE Model employs six steps that provide the interaction needed for participants to apply what has been taught. The steps are as follows: a. Analyze participants b. State objectives c. Select strategies, technology, media, and materials d. Utilize technology, media, and materials e. Require learner participation f. Evaluate and revise Each of these will be discussed in the paragraphs to follow. 1. Analyze participants. Most organizations know little about the basics of properly conducting a business meeting. Determine what participants know about the topic, and determine the learning styles of participants. It is customary to think that a
Cynthia Mayo, PRP
mature audience may learn from just presentation and handouts, but interactivity is required for all. 2. State objectives. Develop objectives that are SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and timely). Use performance terms, such as analyze, demonstrate, practice, apply, arrange, build, classify, compare, complete, conduct, define, evaluate, manipulate, outline, solve, write, etc. 3. Select strategies, technology, media, and materials. The strategies are activities you will use to present the information. You must develop group-centered strategies, which are those that engage students in active learning, such as the opportunity to plan and conduct a meeting, or develop a case study involving the processing of a motion. The main point in selecting the
First Quarter 2014
11
The ASSURE Model for Teaching Leadership Development (continued from previous page)
strategies is that they will result in participants’ achievement of objectives. When selecting technology, media, and materials, consider the diverse needs and interest levels of participants. The components should be interrelated and should align with the objectives. The National Association of Parliamentarians has a variety of materials that may be purchased. 4. Utilize the technology, media, and materials. Follow the four Ps: Process, Preview (the technology, media, and materials), Prepare (the environment and the learning experiences), and Present (interactivity.) 5. Require learner participation. This is a very important step toward meeting the objectives. Participants need to have experience and practice in applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluat-
ing, rather than just memorizing information. Try the following tips for delivering better presentations: • Stand up when presenting • Face participants • Maintain eye contact • Do not read the presentation • Show passion for what you are teaching • Use a natural conversational style • Relate to participants 6. Evaluate and revise. Evaluate the learners’ achievement by answering the following two questions: Did the participants learn what they were required to learn? Can they demonstrate the capabilities specified in the stated objectives? From the answers to those questions, revise the components to increase effectiveness.
Summary
The ASSURE Model is an excellent tool to assure that leadership development (parliamentary procedure) can be taught by engaging the participants. The model incorporates important factors that assure learning by adding key questions:
●●
Who is the audience?
●●
●●
hat are the learning W objectives?
ow will participants be H engaged?
●●
How will it be evaluated? (continued on page 18)
12
National Parliamentarian
ASSURE Model Template Listed below is the ASSURE Model Template: the key to learning and engagement. Analyze Learners • Describe the participants • D escribe the types of knowledge expected of the participants before instruction State Objectives List objectives based on SMART measures: • Specific
• P repare and practice using TMM • Prepare the environment • Prepare the participants • Provide the learning experience • Require Learner Participation • Require active, mental engagement by learners
• Measurable • Attainable • Realistic
• E ngage learners in practice of the knowledge and skills
• Timely
• Provide performance feedback
Select Strategies, Technology, Media, and Materials • Describe all strategies, technology, media, and materials that align with the objectives
Evaluate and Revise • Use assessments that determine learner achievement of objectives • Examine the entire instructional process and the impact of using technology and media
Utilize Technology, Media, and Materials • Preview technology, media, and materials (TMM)
• Revise as needed
References
Fenrich, P. (2005). Creating instructional multimedia solutions: Practical guidelines for the real world. Santa Rosa: Informing Science Press, pp. 5-25. Smaldino, S.E., Lowther, D.L., & Russell, J.D. (2008). Instructional technology and media for learning (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, Pearson Publishing Co. Excellent tool for further understanding of the ASSURE Model http://itchybon1. tripod.com/hrd/id15.html
First Quarter 2014
13
Quick Quiz It’s time for a Quick Quiz, to refresh your knowledge and sharpen your skills. Answers are found in the back of this publication. Be careful; some of these are tricky. 1. How many members voted for a motion that was adopted by unanimous consent? a. b. c. d.
Every member in the organization Every member at the meeting Every member who voted None
2. There are three steps that bring a question before the assembly. Can you name them?
I. _____________________________________________ II. _____________________________________________ III. _____________________________________________ 3. Once the motion has been placed before the assembly, there are three steps in the consideration of the motion. Can you name them? I. ______________________________________________ II. ______________________________________________ III. ______________________________________________
14
National Parliamentarian
Growing NAP Internationally Karen Watson, PRP How does NAP promote international growth without international members? NAP President Ann Guiberson has appointed a special committee during her term to investigate international areas for potential NAP growth. This special committee is exploring how NAP can assist its current members residing outside the United States in recruiting fellow compatriots to NAP. Perhaps just as significant, the committee is asking what NAP has to offer individuals residing outside the United States that would make them want to become members. The work of this special committee covers many issues. Thus it has created four subcommittees. The first, Intellectual Sharing, is re-
Karen Watson, PRP
terials of parliamentary procedure in languages other than English, thereby giving non-English-speaking individuals increased opportunities to study parliamentary procedure. The third, Marketing Partnerships, is exploring possible partnerships with organizations (inside and outside the United States) with established international affiliates needing assistance with parliamentary procedure. And, the fourth, Cultural Awareness, is reviewing current NAP material for cultural bias. Is there assurance that the Development of new NAP services, policies, foreign-language parliamentary and/or procedures may material has the same intellectual arise from the findings credibility as the original of this committee. Would an individual English version? looking at the website realize that NAP is an searching how the content of Rob- international organization? How ert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised can a member residing outside the 11th Edition is distributed and how United States ever be appointed to NAP might be a part of this process. an NAP national-level committee The second, Published Materials, is without the monetary resources investigating the publication of ma- to regularly travel to meetings? Is
First Quarter 2014
15
Growing NAP Internationally (continued from previous page)
there assurance that the foreign language parliamentary material has the same intellectual credibility as the original English version? How can any organization, regardless of location, be assisted by NAP in regards to parliamentary procedure?
lectively speak seven languages—are from diverse backgrounds and locations: Chair Karen Watson (Midwest United States), Lorenzo Cuesta (Western United States), Don Freese (Canada), Susan Glanstein (Pacific United States), Dr. William Puette (Pacific United States), Daniel Ross … although this committee’s work has (Japan), and Maria Truijillo-Tough only just begun, it is likely to continue (Western United well into the future … States). As significant While the world “shrinks” with work goes forward, there is hope advancement of technologies, the that NAP members will embrace need for parliamentary procedure the work of this special committee! increases. President Guiberson ac- NAP members who would like more knowledges that, although this com- information and those interested in mittee’s work has only just begun, serving on the committee are enit is likely to continue well into the couraged to contact Karen Watson, future and beyond her term. Cur- chair of the special committee. rent committee members—who colKaren Watson, PRP, serves NAP at the local, state, and national levels and was awarded ‘Parliamentarian of the Year 2013’ from NSAP.
16
National Parliamentarian
Explaining and Defusing Tense Parliamentary Situations Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP There were two different groups with two different problems, Group Alpha and Group Bravo1. Both organizations had adopted the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised—RONR (11th Jonathan M. Jacobs, ed.). Their problems were different, but both had the PRP potential for exploding on the floor during the meeting. The solutions to these problems, however, had much in common. They both involved explaining what was happening and how to fix the problem. The meeting of Group Alpha promised to be contentious. This group was known for being contentious, and long; one previous meeting lasted over four hours. The chair of this meeting, at her request, was briefed on how to handle disruptions; the parliamentarian expected problems. A proposed amendment to their “policy book” was being offered again, and
(11th ed.), p. 483, ll. 9-13. Once proposed, the amendment would then be sent to the members by mail ballot. The issue had come up at a previous meeting, which caused plenty of controversy. The “contentious” meeting of Group Alpha turned out to last for 39 minutes, and the chair did not have to rule anyone out of order. While there were winners and losers at the meeting, most, if not all, of the participants accepted This group was known for being the procedure and ended the contentious, and long; meeting with the sense of being treated fairly. How was one previous meeting lasted this possible? over four hours. The member, instead of offering the proposed there was a problem. The bylaws amendment, offered a resolution, of the group did not permit the “recommending” that the board membership meeting to propose submit an amendment to the policy any amendment to the policy book; book —RONR (11th ed.), p. 100, ll. only the board of the society or a 18-21. Such a motion would not bind percentage of members, by petition, the board, but it would give the could propose the changes—RONR board a good idea of the sense of the First Quarter 2014
17
Explaining and Defusing Tense Parliamentary Situations (continued from previous page)
membership on the proposal (it lost overwhelmingly). What made the change happen? The meeting of Group Bravo promised to be even more contentious. Group Bravo met about once every six months, in May and Oc-
the ballots to go out and a deadline for which they had to be returned; as this was a motion to, in effect, close the polls, the motion required a twothirds vote—RONR (11th ed.), p. 284, ll. 11-12. This deadline gave the tellers enough time to count the votes and report the results at the adjourned meeting. The votes on these moThe problem, this time, was that tions were unanimous, no one mailed out the ballots. including the votes of the affected candidates for office. The election was contober, and conducted its election of ducted (which ended in a tie for one board members by mail. The results seat and required another round of were to be announced at the Oc- voting). tober meeting. The problem, this So, how did both of these groups time, was that no one mailed out the solve these potentially contentious ballots. There was talk of censuring problems? The parliamentarian (in the current officers. The meeting this case the author) explained it to promised to be confusing and con- them. How it was explained in each tentious. case differed greatly. It was not only While the meeting lasted for that the advice for each dissimilar three hours, the method for handling the election There was talk of censuring the lasted well less than an hour, without the chair current officers. The meeting having to rule anyone out promised to be confusing of order. How was this even possible? and contentious. First, the meeting adopted a motion to Fix the Time to Which To Adjourn and situation was different, but the scheduled an adjourned meeting mechanics of how the explanation for several months later, but before was given was very different. the next regular meeting—RONR In the case of Group Alpha, (11th ed.), pp. 93-94. Second, they the member wishing to amend adopted a motion setting a time for the policy book submitted the 18
National Parliamentarian
amendment to the president of the organization2. The president, who thought there was a problem, sent it to the parliamentarian. The parliamentarian reviewed the bylaws and noted that the meeting of Group Alpha could not amend
then suggested to the board that the parliamentarian be invited to the meeting to explain this. At the regular meeting, the method for holding the adjourned meeting was explained by the parliamentarian, with the permission of the assembly. Draft motions were also submitted, with the clear So, how did both of these understanding that it would be up to the members there groups solve these potentially to adopt the motions. The contentious problems? time and location of the adjourned meeting and the details of when the ballots the policy book. He also advised would be mailed, accepted, and the president, in writing, that a counted were left to the assembly; nonbinding motion to “recommend” this was done within the meeting. to the board that they propose such Both of these situations were an amendment would be in order; handled differently in the mechanics he drafted a motion to do that. He of how the advice was given. In the also explained this to the member, case of Group Alpha, the explanation who understood that if she made was given to the chair (and then her original motion, it would be the to the member). The member was parliamentarian’s advice to the chair aware that the parliamentarian that that the motion is out of order, but … the president of the organization that he would advise the chair that a contacted the parliamentarian and motion making a asked what could be done. “recommendation,” similar to the one drafted, would be in order, though it would not be would advise the chair that the binding on the board. This was done motion, as worded, violated the outside of the meeting. bylaws. An alternative, which, if In the case of Group Bravo, adopted, did not compel the board the president of the organization to draft and submit an amendment contacted the parliamentarian to the policy book, could still be and asked what could be done. He made. The issue could be discussed First Quarter 2014
19
Explaining and Defusing Tense Parliamentary Situations (continued from previous page)
and the opinion of the members attending could be determined. The member understood the bylaws would prohibit the action she originally proposed. And she realized a pantomime of ruling the motion out of order and then attempting to draft a motion that was in order on the floor3 was a lot less effective than simply offering the “recommendation” resolution from the start. The only difference between the traditional role of the parliamentarian advising the chair and this practice was that the person making the motion was eventually brought into the discussion. In Group Bravo’s case, there was a different mechanism: the parliamentarian spoke directly to the assembly. RONR (11th ed.), p. 466, ll. 30-32, notes, “Only on the most involved matters should the parliamentarian actually be called upon to speak to the assembly; and the practice should be avoided if at all possible.” In this situation—with
a group, like most groups, that did not know that there could be an adjourned meeting, much less how to continue on with the election— it was easily a “most involved” situation. In both cases, the chair was thoroughly briefed, in writing. The chair and the members involved understood what they were doing. And they understood the effects of their actions. The decisions rested with the people involved; they knew, however, that their decisions would be within the rules. In each case, it also did something else. It defused a potentially contentious situation. The members understood what was happening and why the chair would be permitting the action. In both cases, it built trust in the officers that they were at least attempting to act in accordance to the rules of the organization. That understanding and trust helped defuse these potentially contentious situations.
End Notes
Both are based on real organizations, but are being labeled pseudonymously here. The Bylaws of Group Alpha required notice of all motions. 3 In some cases, this type of consultation may be needed as well when the motion is made at a meeting. See RONR (11th ed.), p. 39, ll. 17-22. 1
2
Work Cited
Robert, Henry M., Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised, 11th Edition. Eds. Sarah Corbin Robert, et. al., Philadelphia: Da Capo Press, 2011 Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP, CPP, of Philadelphia, PA is the outgoing president of the Pennsylvania Association of Parliamentarians, Inc., and the still-staying secretary of the Delaware Valley Unit.
20
National Parliamentarian
Call for Nominations for the 2014 NAP Educational Foundation Trustee Sandy Olson, PRP This is a call for nominations for the three NAP Educational Foundation trustee positions open in August 2014. Nominations must be made from Annual and Life Contributors of the NAP Educational Foundation. The NAP Educational Foundation is making available many opportunities in youth leadership and education. The Foundation has sponsored three students last year as youth scholars. The Foundation has also assisted in bringing to the biennial convention a representative from the youth partnerships by assisting with the costs associated with their leadership experience. Trustees have also planned, implemented, and completed successful fundraisers, including a silent and live auction, bringing in additional funds for the 2014 Youth Day in Oklahoma City. The Foundation has sponsored the purchase of software allowing for web meetings and web education. The trustees meet by teleconference every other month in consultation for future activities. This group of leaders is very busy and dedicated to gaining funds for additional improvements to youth leadership and professional education advancement. If you know of any individuals who are willing to dedicate time, money, and energy into completing
Sandy Olson, PRP
the various projects of the Foundation, please send the names and brief bios to Sandy Olson, PRP, president of the NAP Educational Foundation, by the dates appearing on the NAP Educational Foundation website. Three trustees will be completing their first complete terms on the board in August, 2014. Responsibilities include, but are not limited to, the following: • Attend all trustee meetings, which are held electronically. • Work in preparation for and at each NAPEF event. • Solicit donations for the Annual NAPEF auction. • Serve as a committee chairman and support the other committees. • Actively promote the NAPEF among NAP members. • Annually make a financial contribution to NAPEF. For a description of the process, please see the news page of the NAPEF.org website.
First Quarter 2014
21
Words From the Pros In this feature, professional parliamentarians offer some advice from their experiences in the parliamentary world.
Question: What was the most surprising thing about your first jobs as a parliamentarian? Everything was new. Everything was surprising. If I had to pick one thing, I would say that the “most surprising” thing would be that I didn’t need to instantly recall all 700+ pages of Robert’s Rules of Order. Everything I needed to know for this initial gig comprised like 2% of The Book. - Kim Goldsworthy, PRP
That, after whispering my advice to the chair, he announced loudly, “On the advice of the parliamentarian … ” - Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP It surprises me how ‘revered’ the client will treat a parliamentarian. - Karen Watson, PRP
Question: What is your method for keeping notes during a meeting at which you are serving as parliamentarian? It’s a system (formulated by trial and error). But, at the end of the meeting, I can recite back exactly what happened during the meeting and at what time – much like a scorekeeper for a baseball game. It’s a really neat skill I think I have developed. - Karen Watson, PRP
22
Pictographs - Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP I finally got around to buying a notebook. For the longest time, I merely depended on the hotel’s free note pads for taking my notes. - Kim Goldsworthy, PRP
National Parliamentarian
Question: What advice would you give about taking that first call from a prospective client? Remember to get contact information. A name, a title, a phone number, an e-mail address. After that, get a date and a location of the meeting. And when you save the text file on your computer, include the date and time of the telephone call, because often that call will be part of the billable items in your invoice, assuming the gig is landed. In your invoice, under “miscellaneous,” you will write, “Wed. Nov. 20, 2013, 4:58 p.m., 20 minutes; initial consultation by phone; $0.00,” thus showing that you, as a professional, do
take every client communication seriously enough to document it thoroughly, even if you don’t charge for that specific communication. - Kim Goldsworthy, PRP Know in advance what services you offer and what you charge. Then, stick to it. - Karen Watson, PRP Get the name of the client, the group, the issue, and the address to mail the bill. - Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP
Question: What advice would you give to a new parliamentarian who is giving a training seminar to a new client? Develop a “stock program” that can be modified for the group. - Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP Make sure there is an extensive, verbal practice session!
Don’t get hung up on presenting “your” lesson. It is much more meaningful and wise to answer their questions of their past mistakes, their recent mishaps . . . - Kim Goldsworthy, PRP
- Karen Watson, PRP
First Quarter 2014
23
Word From the Pros (continued from previous page)
Question: What would be your biggest tip for preparing for the RP exam? Learn the terminology, not just the rule. I have found that the exact term and phraseology is sometimes the key data in answering an examination question. For example, there is a difference between the two phrases, “fix the time to which to adjourn” (to set a future meeting date/time of the current session) vs. “fix the time at which to adjourn” (to set the hour to end the meeting). - Kim Goldsworthy, PRP
Study to understand the principles behind parliamentary law as much as knowing answers to the exam. Read Parliamentary Law; and, in RONR, read the Preface, Introduction, and section on Principles Underlying Parliamentary Law. - Karen Watson, PRP Do simulations of the test, repeatedly. - Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP
Question: What advice would you give to a new parliamentarian who is consulting on a bylaw revision? You are writing something that may be around for decades. Think broadly and don’t make any mistakes. - Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP Clarify with the members of the organization what they desire the structure of the organization to be. Then, strategize the revision in the bylaws. - Karen Watson, PRP
Mistakes in spelling and grammar are common. I feel that it is part of my job to offer corrections in areas like spelling and grammar as well as parliamentary procedure. It is a given that a parliamentarian will find the errors in logic, and find inconsistencies, and find gaps. Your recommendations should include (a.) where to make changes in current wording; (b.) adding rules, or adding language, to better cover the thinner areas. - Kim Goldsworthy, PRP
24
National Parliamentarian
Unit Spotlight The Unit featured in this spotlight has recently celebrated its 50th year. NP would like to congratulate the Santa Fe Trail Unit for promoting parliamentary procedure for a half century.
Santa Fe Trail Unit members: (left to right) Historian Joy Freeland; Linda Sehrt (prospective member); Carolyn Tillman; Vice President Shirley McCarty; Charter Member Mary Pisciotta (holding anniversary cake); Fred Larsen; Treasurer Teresa Dean; Bobbie NicholsonStevenson; Jane Sharon.
Santa Fe Trail Unit Unit formed: September 1963 Current Members: 22 Meeting Place: Trinity Episcopal Church Independence, MO Meeting Time: 3rd Thursday, 7:00 p.m., except Dec, Jun, Jul and Aug Unit Dues: $7 Registered Members: 3 PRPs, 1 PRP-R, 5 RPs
The unit celebrated this milestone in September 2013. What is the secret to this unit’s enduring success? NP asked a few questions on that very subject.
What do you do to attract new members? Meeting notices are sent to the local newspapers and a tradition of hosting a workshop continues from
First Quarter 2014
25
Unit Spotlight (continued from previous page)
the 1964 inaugural event, where members of the public interested in parliamentary procedure are invited.
How do you make learning fun for your members?
Your unit is most proud of which accomplishments over the last several years? Producing a number of MSAP and NAP officers that got their start in the Santa Fe Trail Unit.
Participation in scripts during programs, covering a variety of topics; getting new members involved in the programs and other unit activities; trivia challenge with a few questions at each meeting about procedure and the unit’s history.
How will your unit celebrate parliamentary law month?
How do you encourage provisionals to become members?
Have an element of fun in your meetings to keep those attending engaged and open to learning. Who says parliamentary procedure has to be dull?
Offer annual study groups and provide one-on-one sessions upon request. Work to make meetings fun and informational.
How do you encourage members to pursue registration and professional registration? Study groups are formed and meetings continue to focus on our mission statement, which is to promote the study, teaching and use of good parliamentary procedure.
What’s the biggest struggle that your unit faces? Member retention and finding new outlets to expose individuals to parliamentary law. 26
Display in local libraries, emphasis in materials at the unit’s April workshop.
What advice would you give to other units?
How do you engage the public and local organizations?
Send monthly meeting notices to the newspaper and keep leaders in the community—and civic organizations as well as other units—on our mailing list for the annual April workshop.
How do you spread the word about the benefits of parliamentary procedure and NAP? Through the unit’s monthly scheduled meetings and annual workshop. Several unit members use the knowledge from study opportunities to make meetings
National Parliamentarian
more efficient in other organizations to which they belong.
In the new biennium, how do you plan to lead the way to “Create the Future” of NAP? Unit members have long volunteered with organizations such as Skills USA, as trainers and judges, for competitions
using parliamentary procedure and knowledge of parliamentary law. Continuing the unit’s annual workshop and offering study groups to support members’ interest in both the national association and general study of parliamentary procedure. Bringing an awareness of the topic through the use of technology.
In Memoriam NP commemorates the following members who have passed from our midst; may they rest in peace:
Jean S. Mostrom, California Phyllis J. Wood, Florida Cecina Koeijmans, Texas Gretta S. Baur, Utah Elizabeth Pav, Louisiana Portia “Shirley” Chapman, Colorado (the great-granddaughter of Henry M. Robert)
Alice E. Ragona, Colorado Patricia D. Hammers, California Nancy G. Hansford, Ohio Russell E. Wingfield, Louisiana
First Quarter 2014
27
Mystery Motion See if you can uncover the identity of the mystery motions below by reviewing the clues. Report to the back of this issue to find out if you nabbed the right suspect.
Mystery Motion 1 (easy) I am used to modify the wording of a pending motion. Mystery Motion 2 (easy) I can be used to create a short intermission in a meeting, but I do not close the meeting.
Mystery Motion 6 (intermediate) I can only be made by a member who voted on the prevailing side of the motion to which I am to apply.
Mystery Motion 3 (easy) I am the highest-ranking subsidiary motion, along with being one of the most widely misused.
Mystery Motion 7 (intermediate) I can allow the assembly to do something that it could not otherwise do without violating one or more of its regular rules. In most circumstances, I require a two-thirds vote for adoption.
Mystery Motion 4 (intermediate) I can be used to close debate on a pending motion, but I can’t impose an immediate closing of debate.
Mystery Motion 8 (intermediate) Although many people might think I bring a meeting to an end, I’m actually used to create a meeting.
Mystery Motion 5 (intermediate) I’m not out of order, but I’m not necessary. If I am made, a vote is never taken on me. And, just to be clear, the chair never rules on me, either.
Mystery Motion 9 (difficult) I’m a debatable incidental motion that requires a second, but I’m not amendable.
28
Mystery Motion 10 (difficult) Only an affirmative vote on me can be reconsidered.
National Parliamentarian
New Professional Registered Parliamentarians! NP congratulates the following individuals for attaining the highest credential awarded by the National Association of Parliamentarians:
John R. Berg, Washington Donald I. Garrett, Virginia Lori A. Lukinuk, Ontario Canada Michael C. Taliercio, North Carolina
(Left to right) Mary Randolph, Gwen Brown, Henry M. Robert III, Sandy Olson, Nancy Sylvester, Mike Chamberlain, Ann Guiberson, Maurice S. Henderson
First Quarter 2014
29
Two Minutes of Procedure Second The purpose of a second is to prevent time from being wasted by the assembly in having to dispose of a motion that only one member wants to see introduced. Any member can second another member’s motion and need not obtain the floor to do so. The member simply says, “I second the motion,” “I second it,” or “Second!” Becoming a seconder carries no burdens or responsibilities. It doesn’t imply that you are in favor of or opposed to the motion. It simply means you want to see it come before the assembly. You’re free to speak against it in debate, move to amend it, and vote against it. If a motion doesn’t receive a second, it dies, and the assembly moves on to the next item of business. Oops! If the chair accidentally begins to place before the assembly a motion that has not received a second, any member can point out the mistake and prevent the motion from being considered, so long as it remains without a second. However, keep your eyes open, because if nobody catches the mistake by the time debate or voting has begun, the motion no longer requires a second, and it gets to stay. That’s right: once debate or voting begins on a motion, a second is no longer necessary. And any motion that is adopted without having received a second is nonetheless adopted, just as if it had received a second. In committees and small boards, seconds are not required. The chair should refrain from seconding motions, in order to preserve the appearance of im-partiality. The name of the seconder does not go into the minutes, unless ordered by the assembly. See RONR (11th ed.), p. 35-37.
30
National Parliamentarian
Motion Spotlight Secondary Amendment
Do you know what a secondary amendment is and how to use it? Are you sure? When the best parliamentary teams in the country compete in parliamentary competitions, they are frequently required to demonstrate a secondary amendment, and only about 10-20% percent tend to get it right. Sometimes an entire day of competition will see not one team properly execute a secondary amendment. However, these teams generally believe they’ve pulled it off. So, what is so tricky about a secondary amendment? The most common mistake is to simply amend the main motion a second time. That does not constitute a secondary amendment. A secondary amendment proposes to change a primary amendment. This means that a secondary amendment can only be made while a primary amendment is pending. Let’s look at an example of a proper secondary amendment: Main Motion: That five hundred dollars be donated to the Save the Parliamentarians fund.
Primary Amendment: To insert “annually on January 20th” after the word “donated”. Secondary Amendment: To strike “January” and insert “March”. Notice that the secondary amendment does NOT propose to modify the language of the pending main motion. It proposes to modify the language of the primary amendment. Now, look at the following example, and decide whether each of the secondary amendments below is proper: Main Motion: That five hundred dollars be donated to the Save the Parliamentarians fund. Primary Amendment: To strike “five hundred dollars be donated” and insert “members be encouraged to donate”
How many of the following are examples of a proper secondary amendment? a. To strike out “the Save the Parliamentarians fund” and insert “reputable organizations concerned with preserving the well being of parliamentarians” b. To strike “members be encouraged to donate”
c. To strike out “donate” and insert “contribute” d. To strike out “members be encouraged to donate” and insert “an advertisement be purchased in the newspaper to bring attention”
First Quarter 2014
31
Parliamentary Myths
The Myth of the Silent Parliament There is a common myth that the parliamentarian has a duty to remain unseen and unheard. A parliamentarian serving an organization will discover that there is a greater duty to provide clarity and instill a sense of confidence in the rules and the procedure, by directly addressing the assembly upon occasion for the purpose of shedding light on the parliamentary situation at hand. This is done only with the permission of the presiding officer and the consent of the assembly. And it is often a very welcome service, since it allows the chair to completely remove the appearance of doubt, and it allows the chair to stay out of the hot seat. Whenever a confusing parliamentary situation arises, the chair can simply say, “The chair will have the parliamentarian explain the rules.” This also creates a sense of trust on the part of the assembly, not just a trust in the competency of the parliamentarian, but also a trust in the fairness of the rules. It is important to remember that we must provide a service to our clients, and we have a duty to assist those clients with the application of the rules. Your modest editor has received heartfelt congratulations and even standing ovations from grateful members of organizations, not for remaining unheard, but for addressing the assembly to explain the nuances of procedure, turning chaos into order.
32
National Parliamentarian
IN MEMORY Portia Shirley Mathews Chapman died unexpectedly from a stroke on Friday, November 22, 2013, in Lone Tree, Colorado at the age of 83.
Portia Shirley Mathews
Shirley was born on June 23, 1930 in Toronto, Canada. She was the great-granddaughter of Brigadier General Henry Martyn Robert, author of Robert’s Rules of Order.
Shirley was an accomplished parliamentarian and a Professional Registered Parliamentarian of the National Association of Parliamentarians. She was active in several units, including the Professional Parliamentary Research Unit, and held the offices of vice-president and treasurer of the Colorado Association of Parliamentarians, as well as being active on committees. Shirley often wrote bylaws, was a convention parliamentarian, wrote and published articles and skits, and made speeches about General Henry Robert. Most of all Shirley enjoyed consulting and unraveling esoteric parliamentary problems. Shirley dedicated herself to her family and to her love of Parliamentary Law.
First Quarter 2014
33
2013-2015 NAP Executive Board
Back row: Mike Chamberlain, James N. Jones, Steve Glanstein, Jim Stewart, Daniel Ivey-Soto Front row: Evan Lemoine, Mary Randolph, Ann Guiberson, Ann Rempel
2013-2015 District Directors Executive Director Mike Chamberlain
34
Back row: Daniel Ivey-Soto, Denise Irminger, Joyce Brown-Watkins, John Hohlbauch Front row: Bill Starkey, Alice Bartelt, Nancy Dauster, Darlene Allen
National Parliamentarian
President Ann Guiberson, with her husband Ron
NAP Educational Foundation President Sandy Olson
First Quarter 2014
35
Answer Key Quick Quiz
Answer 1 d. None; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 54, ll. 13-29 Answer 2 I. A member makes the motion. II. Another member seconds the motion. III. The chair states the motion (e.g. It is moved and seconded to recess for five minutes). Answer 3 I. Members debate the motion. II. The chair puts the question to a vote. III. The chair announces the result of the vote. Motion Spotlight: Secondary Amendment
Both c and d are examples of proper secondary amendments. Mystery Motion Mystery Motion 1: Amend; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 130
Mystery Motion 2: Recess; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 230
Mystery Motion 3: Lay on the Table; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 215, l. 10 & tinted page 4
Mystery Motion 4: Limit or Extend Limits of Debate; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 191, ll. 19-27
Mystery Motion 5: A motion to approve the minutes; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 354, ll. 23-24 & p. 355, ll. 5-6.
36
Mystery Motion 6: Reconsider;
see RONR (11th ed.), p. 315, ll. 28-34
Mystery Motion 7: Suspend the Rules; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 260, ll. 19-26
Mystery Motion 8: Fix the Time to Which to Adjourn; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 242, ll. 20-24
Mystery Motion 9: Appeal; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 398, ll. 18-33
Mystery Motion 10: Postpone Indefinitely; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 127, ll. 17-25 & tinted page 46
National Parliamentarian
Questions & Answers
The intent of this column is to provide general answers or advice (not formal, official opinions) about the questions asked. The answers are based on RONR (11th ed.), unless otherwise indicated, and do not take into account such governing authorities as statutes, bylaws, or adopted special rules of order. Questions should be mailed to Josh Martin, PRP, 1434 Grand Ave, Apt 9, St. Paul, MN 55105, or e-mailed to jcmartin7872@gmail.com.
Q&A 1
Cannon Find Eligible Member for Critical Office
Q
My chapter in a national organization has a bylaw that fills a vacancy by special election within 30 days of the vacancy. We have two critical vacancies that no qualified member wants to take. What can the president do to resolve the problem? The offices cannot remain vacant based upon
the national organization’s bylaws. In this case can the local president appoint members that may not have all the qualifications for the position or will the chapter be in noncompliance with the national organization and thus be suspended from operations? Please advise.
A
The president cannot appoint members who are not qualified, unless there is some clause in the bylaws which would allow for that in this situation. Rules in the bylaws cannot be suspended unless
Parliamentary Research Team
Josh Martin, PRP Parliamentary Research Editor
Ann Homer, PRP Assistant Research Editor
Ronald Stinson, PRP NAP Past President Consultant
First Quarter 2014
Leonard Young, PRP NAP Parliamentarian
37
Questions and Answers (continued from previous page)
the rule provides for its own suspension or if the rule is in the nature of a rule of order, which this is not. See RONR (11th ed), p. 263, ll. 1-7. Unless the bylaws provide otherwise, the only options to fill the vacancy are to find someone who is qualified or to change the qualifications for the position by amending the bylaws. It’s not possible to give a general answer about what would happen if the president violated the bylaws in this instance, since that will depend heavily on the bylaws of the chapter and the national organization.
Q&A 2
Electing a Slate of Officers
Q
Our bylaws require a ballot vote to elect officers. Is it in order to make a motion to elect a slate of officers, so long as the motion is voted on by ballot?
A
It depends on what you mean by electing a slate of officers. If the goal is to elect a group of officers by a single up-or-down vote, no, the motion is not in order. The purpose of a requirement for a ballot vote for an election, unless the bylaws suggest otherwise, is not only to provide secrecy, but to grant members the right to vote for any eligible candidate, including “write-
38
in” votes for candidates who have not been nominated. See RONR (11th ed), p. 439, ll. 22-23; p. 441, l. 25 – p. 442, l. 2. There is also the fact that voting “for” or “against” candidates in an election is not proper. The way to vote against a candidate is to vote for someone else. See RONR (11th ed), p. 414, ll. 1-5. If the bylaws did not require a ballot vote, the motion would be in order, but it would require unanimous consent for adoption. When a motion contains a series of motions dealing with different subjects, such as separate offices, a single member may demand a separate vote on one or more of the motions in the series. See RONR (11th ed), p. 274-275. On the other hand, if the goal is simply to list multiple offices on the same ballot, while permitting members to still cast a separate vote for each office, the motion is in order. See RONR (11th ed), p. 413, ll. 21-23.
Q&A 3
Presentation During Debate
Q
At a city council meeting— there are fewer than 12 members—one member makes PowerPoint presentations during debate. Is it in order for a member to give a PowerPoint presentation
National Parliamentarian
during debate? It should be noted that the presentation takes up much debate time. Also, during meetings there is a wide disparity of participation among members. Is there some action the chair could take to encourage participation?
A
Assuming that any PowerPoint, Keynote, or similar presentation during debate is germane to the pending question—RONR (11th ed.), p. 392, ll. 5-10—one must ask, “Is such a presentation in the nature of reading a paper?” If so, then permission of the assembly— in this case, the city council—is required: “If any member objects, a member has no right to read from … any paper or book as part of his speech, without permission of the assembly.” See RONR (11th ed.), p. 393, ll. 30-33. However, it might be the custom of this city council to assume permission to read papers unless there’s a specific objection to do so. This assumption, though, is based on the fact that whatever is read is done “only in debate on a pending question.” See RONR (11th ed.), p. 298, fn. Remember, also, that in small boards, such as this city council, there is no limit to the number of speeches during debate unless the council itself chooses to impose such limits. See RONR (11th ed.), p.
488, first fn. If such a presentation as described above is allowed, it is up to the chair to see to it that the presentation does not negatively affect debate or interfere with the assembly’s business. See RONR (11th ed.), p. 450, ll. 9-13. The chair, of course, cannot force anyone to participate in debate, but he or she may make certain that everyone who wishes to speak on a question has the chance do so. For example, the chair might ask specifically if “council member Jane Doe wishes to speak on the question” before recognizing a person who already has spoken, even though there might be no limits on debate.
Q&A 4
Appropriate Use of a Point of Order
Q
When can a “Point of Order” be used? Can it only be used when there is a motion on the floor or at other times? How many times can it be used?
A
A point of order can be raised at any time regarding a breach of the rules, although in most cases it must be raised promptly. See RONR (11th ed), p. 250, ll. 19-20. It may be raised when another member has the floor, even interrupting a member if the point
First Quarter 2014
39
requires immediate attention. See RONR (11th ed), p. 249, ll. 13-16. There are occasions when a point of order would be appropriate when no motion is pending, such as a point of order regarding a motion that has just been made, or regarding indecorous language in a report. There is no limit on the number of times a member may raise a legitimate point of order, although members should generally avoid making points of order on minor technicalities and focus on errors which would infringe on members’ rights or disrupt the proper transaction of business. See RONR (11th ed), p. 250, ll. 11-15. Additionally, if the chair is certain that a member is repeatedly raising points of order in order to obstruct business, he should rule them out of order or refuse to recognize the member. See RONR (11th ed), p. 342, l. 35 – p. 343, l. 3.
40
Q&A 5 E-Mail Voting
Q
Please provide the best accepted method/process for e-mail voting. Although not stated in the bylaws, the body agreed to use this method one time to complete a revision to the bylaws.
A
RONR does not contain recommendations for a vote by e-mail. The recommended practices for votes by mail are discussed in RONR (11th ed), p. 424-425, and these could be used as a starting point for developing similar rules for a vote by e-mail. If the organization’s bylaws do not authorize e-mail voting, then it cannot be used. Voting by e-mail violates the fundamental principle of parliamentary law that the vote is limited to members who are actually present at the time of the vote. See RONR (11th ed), p. 423, ll. 17-25. This rule cannot be suspended, and any action taken in violation of this rule is null and void. See RONR (11th ed), p. 263, ll. 15-24; p. 251, ll. 3-26.
National Parliamentarian
Parliamentary Law Month Proclamation April 2014 WHEREAS, since April is the birth month of Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the first American manual of parliamentary procedure in 1801, it is an appropriate time to honor him and celebrate the use of parliamentary procedure; WHEREAS, it is fitting to honor Henry Martyn Robert, author of Pocket Manual of Rules of Order for Deliberative Assemblies, also known as Robert’s Rules of Order; WHEREAS, Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised is the most widely recognized and used parliamentary authority in public and private organizations; WHEREAS, it is timely to reflect upon the importance of parliamentary procedure in providing for civil discourse, protecting individual rights, ensuring fairness, and in maintaining order in meetings; WHEREAS, The National Association of Parliamentarians® has, by adoption of a standing rule, designated the month of April as Parliamentary Law Month; WHEREAS, the National Association of Parliamentarians® is a professional society dedicated to educating leaders throughout the world in effective meeting management through the use of parliamentary procedure; and WHEREAS, the vision of the National Association of Parliamentarians® is to provide parliamentary leadership to the world; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That I, Ann Guiberson, PRP, President of the National Association of Parliamentarians®, do hereby declare April 2014 as Parliamentary Law Month and call upon the districts, associations, units, and all members to observe the month with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities as a way to carry out our mission and bring our vision into reality.
Q: Why are none of these parliamentarians eating? (Clockwise from far left) Gwen Brown Karen Herbert Joyce Henderson Ann Guiberson Ron Guiberson Barbara Rosi Ann Rempel Mary Randolph LaVonne Ellis
(Clockwise from far left) Rosalie Stroman Gretchen Denton Virginia Berberick Denise Irminger Darlene Allen Becky Rutz Greg Goodwiller Virginia Harris Maurice S. Henderson
(Clockwise from far left) Mike Chamberlain Evan Lemoine Donna Thompson Kathy Boyer Carrie Dickson Beulah Sutherland Jim Slaughter
A: Probably because they’re under the impression that some interrupting business must be disposed of before it is in order to “take from the table” what has been “laid on the table.” [See RONR (11th ed.), p. 213, ll. 6-8 & p. 301, ll. 8-11]