“A must for all current and future association and unit leaders!”
August 9-10, 2024
Discover what it takes to be a great leader or your association or unit. topics include:
• Planning Conventions & Events
• Promoting units, Associations, and Events
• How to Volunteer & Encourage Others
• How to Network & Make the Most of Your NAP Events
• soft skills for Leaders
• How to use scripts in teaching
• How to Plan Your Year
Watch your inbox for registration details!
.org
• www .parliamentarians .org
Editor
Traci Bransford-Marquis, PRP
npeditor@nap2 org
Assistant Editor
Josh Martin, PRP
NP Review Committee
Ann Guiberson, PRP, Chair
Lynna Gene Cook, PRP
Kirk Overbey, PRP
Nancy Sylvester, PRP
Parliamentary Research Committee
Michael Malamut, PRP, Chair
Shannon Sun, PRP
Michael C Taeliciero, PRP
Rachel Glanstein, PRP, Committee Advisor
C J Cavin, PRP, NAP Parliamentarian/Consultant
Special Consultant
Ronald Dupart, 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 (17th ed ) and may be edited for content and length Article text should be submitted in Microsoft Word or rich text format and transmitted via email Illustrations, photographic prints and high-resolution photos are welcome . Materials submitted will not be returned unless special arrangements are made in advance with the editor . Contributors must include a completed “Assignment and Transfer of Copyright” form with their submission, granting NAP the copyright or permission to publish .
Submission Deadlines
Volume 85, No 4 (Summer 2024) May 1, 2024
Volume 86, No . 1 (Fall 2024)
Volume 86, No
2 (Winter 2025)
August 1, 2024
In the last issue, I asked my fellow NAP Parliamentarians why they enjoy parliamentary procedure . Pamela Williams Kelly, President of the Tennessee Beta Unit, wrote a letter to the editor stating the following:
“…I like parliamentary procedure because it creates order in the midst of calm, confusion or debate . And, I like order in meetings to properly prepare and understand the mission .
What I love about parliamentary procedure is that it can be a weapon or a shield to support or combat personalities . It has been useful in the past to move disgruntled board members out…”
Another submission came from Gwendolyn Jarvis, RP, who stated:
“Practicing parliamentary procedure brings balance and order to meetings, as it creates a positive force in handling the business at hand in an efficient, productive and timely manner . ”
I agree with both parliamentarians . Knowing parliamentary procedure fosters meaningful dialogue, not only in meetings, but also between two friends with opposing views . I am a better lawyer because of this knowledge . Our parliamentarian colleagues who are engineers and teachers and Indian chiefs, I hope, say the same . I listen better and stay detached in arguments more often than not . I thank these two parliamentarians for each one’s “letter to the editor . ” (Email that is .)
All for now, Traci Bransford-Marquis, PRP Editor, npeditor@nap2.org
In the words of journalist John Andrew Holmes, “It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifling exception, is composed of others.”
Army veteran Henry M . Robert, the great parliamentary pioneer, was also known as the great peacemaker . As Robert advised, “You cannot force people to agree with you . But when persons are approached in a conciliatory spirit, with an evident desire for the general good and willingness to yield personal preferences, where it can be done with no injury to others, I have found people responsive . ” Ralph C . Smedley, The Great Peacemaker, (Los Angeles, 1955) . This respectful approach to fellow human beings is logical, as one cannot expect peace in a meeting if consideration to the members is not practiced at other times as well . Decorum within meetings is enforceable; decorum at other times is also indispensable for a thriving organization . While basic good manners are required in meetings, one should not turn good behavior off when leaving the assembly . We should not comport ourselves in a professional and respectful manner only when we can be made to behave . Parliamentary procedure provides a method whereby people can work together . At its core is respect for other people and varying opinions . We must show this respect by welcoming people from all backgrounds and skill levels . In dealing with our fellow members, we need open minds and open hearts . In meetings, we need to know the rules and enforce them . In interactions with fellow members, we may advocate for our position passionately, but we should never abandon respect for others . At all times, we should promote a spirit of cooperation and engage in fair dealing with colleagues, as directed by the Code of Professional Responsibility for Parliamentarians . A few key points are worth remembering:
• A domineering approach is antithetical to the values of parliamentary procedure .
• Words of encouragement make the difference in who stays involved .
• Let other people talk! In meetings, members have a right to speak and a duty to listen .
• If necessary, make suggestions for improvement in a gentle manner, preferring private discussions . On the other hand, make public your praise .
• Members are equal, whether they are new or old, popular or not, adept at parliamentary procedure or not .
• Listen with an open mind to everyone who speaks . Hear new ideas and learn past practices .
• Acknowledge people doing something good .
• Leadership may be shown by someone in an elected or appointed position .
• Leadership may also be shown by personal qualities that shine without regard to position .
• Give your fellow members the benefit of the doubt and presume goodwill .
• Ask members to participate in areas where they can be strong . Most people build skills gradually, so be patient and encouraging, and
• Demonstrate a kind, patient attitude toward others . Sarcastic, snippy answers prevent members from asking questions and stifle participation .
Demonstrate inclusiveness toward people from a wide variety of backgrounds . People become interested in parliamentary procedure from many types of associations (such as service clubs, labor unions, political parties, professional organizations, fraternities and sororities, religious bodies, homeowner and condominium associations, nonprofits, and advocacy groups) . How delightful to find people like you; how wonderful to find people who are nothing like you! When meeting as a district, an association, or a unit, be sure you do not favor a particular group; rather, focus on your common bond of NAP membership .
While gaining more knowledge in parliamentary procedure and forming stronger bonds within the NAP world, let us never forget the goals of parliamentary procedure . Why use your powers to destroy or diminish when you can build people up instead? Similarly, if you feel negative pressures, seek out people who lift you up rather than pull you down .
Good parliamentary meetings require courtesy as do thriving parliamentary organizations . A culture of kindness will retain members, permit greater confidence, and result in increased activity and growth in membership . Members of NAP have demonstrated a strong interest in the study of parliamentary procedure . All these members belong and should be valued . Constantly remember that goodwill towards these fellow members is always in order .
Alison Wallis, PRP 2023-2025 NAP President
I assumed the Mentor-Mentee coordinator position of the Professional Development Committee . The following paragraphs are open messages to the regular NAP members, Registered Parliamentarians, and all NAP members .
To regular NAP members: Have you considered becoming a Registered Parliamentarian? Are you unsure what to study or how to prepare for the Registered Parliamentarian Credentialing Exam (RPCE)? If you answered yes to the preceding questions, if you would like to work with a mentor, please contact Donna Thompson, PRP, to be assigned to a mentor .
To Registered Parliamentarians: Have you considered becoming a Professional Registered Parliamentarian? Are you unsure what to study or how to prepare for the Professional Registered Parliamentarian Credentialing Exam (PRPCE)? If you answered yes to the preceding questions, if you would like to work with a mentor, please contact Donna Thompson, PRP, to be assigned to a mentor .
To all NAP members: Have you been approached by people who have expressed a desire to become a NAP member? Would you be interested in becoming a mentor that assists that person to study, take, and pass the NAP membership test? If you answered yes to the preceding questions, please contact Donna Thompson, PRP, to be assigned to a mentee .
Donna J . Thompson, PRP Mentor-Mentee Coordinator Madprez10272@yahoo .com
By Linda Nichols, RP
In the ever-evolving realm of our lives, technology stands as a potent force. As the former Technology Chair for the Green Gavel Electronic Unit (GGEU), my role involved redefining our unit’s landscape through strategic technological integration.
This article shares a condensed narrative highlighting the key goals and insights on how we carried out this important task.
Our primary objectives were clear: to utilize top-notch technology tools to enhance the online experience for our members . By setting clear technological objectives, we knew this would lead to accomplishing the primary goal of elevating member experience . These were the critical objectives we focused on during our planning: 1
I created a spreadsheet outlining our critical objectives and compiled a list of several software solution criteria, which I called our Strategic Selection Playbook . With this powerful tool in hand, the president and I met with several vendors/companies, using this guide for our selection process . Here are the critical competencies we used when selecting a potential solution provider:
6
Once we agreed upon these objectives, we developed a strategic selection plan to help us determine what was needed by a solution provider . Through dedicated research,
• Defined Goals and Allocated Budget: Throughout the selection process, we aimed to ensure that the vendor’s plans clearly articulated our GGEU technology integration goals and aligned with our enhanced member experiences strategy . For example, one of our goals was to have an easier way to send information to our members . The software platform that we eventually chose gave us the option to quickly use embedded templates
a membership app, which one competitor used to raise their quote by nearly 700% . After comparing all bids and offerings, we selected a software platform that met each of our objectives while keeping us on budget . Another deliverable for our request for proposal was streamlining the membership process . Understanding that a membership management platform must include many facets of the member experience (such as a well-designed website, a members-only section, a member directory, and the ability to pay dues), we ensured that this was met in our platform selection .
• Tech Exploration and DecisionMaking: After conducting comprehensive research on diverse technological solutions offered by each vendor, we engaged our prospects in enlightening sessions to learn from their representatives how they could support our request . After an initial visit with each company to verify that they
changes without involving one of their engineers . This immediately raised a “red flag” for our team . As an administrator of the platform, you never want to be in a position where you constantly have to wait or seek permission to make routine changes for your unit .
• Decision Day Drama: Once we completed the second phase of the vetting process, we conducted final interviews with the top three vendors . These interviews explored evaluating their offerings, making decisions based on goal alignment and budget constraints, and navigating sales tactics cautiously by relying on well-informed research .
At the end of the day, we chose a member management software solution provider that offered the most value for our budget while meeting all of our criteria and objectives . Upon implementing this tool for our electronic unit, we were able to offer the following benefits to our members:
We introduced a dynamic photo directory and a member/administrator app . The membership app allowed members to send direct messages to one another, which proved very helpful when members wanted to quickly communicate with one another . The app also allowed members to access the digital library and quickly renew membership dues .
• Innovative Digital Library: We streamlined our storage utilization with a website library for unit meetings media . This feature allows us to store some of our unit’s documents and media using the allocated storage, eliminating the need for additional storage purchases .
• Streamlined Membership Processes: We simplified the way
elevated the membership experience but also liberated volunteers to focus on meaningful tasks . Our First VP, who is responsible for membership reporting of new members and member anniversaries, reported that the software drastically reduced the workload to the point where her committee had little to do . This was what I call a “Praise Report . ” Through the efficient use of technological tools, we’ve improved service standards and created an enriched environment for both members and volunteers . In my two years of service in this role, I was happy to advance the member experience through the use of technology and innovation . I am thankful for the opportunity to serve the members of GGEU through the use of technology . It certainly is the great equalizer . NP
Linda Nichols, rP, has been a member of GGEU since 2022 . Linda quickly passed the NAP exam scoring 100 percent and subsequently studied and passed the RP exam
She credits the sound educational opportunities that GGEU offers for this success
Since becoming a member, Linda has served as the GGEU Technology and Youth Education Committees’ Chair . Her husband and three sons are also GGEU members .
The client asks for an explanation and wants it as a written opinion . Here’s the situation, she says…then it develops that there is an opinion already . Great . From another parliamentarian who knows the organization and is trying to explain what happened . What if we disagree? What if he’s wrong? What if I’m wrong? What is wrong?
The optimistic thing is to view this as an opportunity to work with someone new . Maybe there is something to be learned together .
This article is about the authors’ shared involvement in a messy situation . This article is about the authors’ shared involvement in a messy situation caused by people not understanding the consequences of an adjourned meeting . RONR (12th ed .) 9:17
It is a simple annual meeting . There are reports and updates and election of new directors . But enthusiasm for handling those pesky bylaws amendments is vanishing fast . Near what should have been the
conclusion of the meeting, a member moves “that when this meeting adjourns, it adjourns to meet several weeks later . ” This is the motion to Fix the Time to Which to Adjourn which sets the time of an adjourned meeting . The date is agreed upon and the motion is adopted . No big deal, right?
Shortly after that, the annual meeting adjourns . Students of parliamentary procedure know that newly elected board members generally take office when elected, unless the bylaws state otherwise . In this case, the bylaws are explicit that the terms of office begin at the conclusion of the annual meeting . The freshly elected directors, believing that the bylaws require it, meet within days to elect new officers . See the problem? Side note: this story ends with about a dozen problems, but this is the problem right now! The meeting hasn’t concluded .
Fully half of those present did not understand what “adjourned meeting” meant . With the new directors
wrongly assuming they had authority, a difficult and legally challenging situation developed . This was all because too many people did not understand the implications of a meeting that had not yet ended . As soon as “continued meeting” was explained, understanding followed . It was then clear to all that the “new” directors could not yet elect officers . Establishing an adjourned meeting is a good tool in the parliamentary toolbox . But parliamentarians also should be concerned about other practicalities . Is this an annual meeting? Will a delay in the transition of new directors and officers cause problems? Is the adjourned meeting to be in-person? If so, what are the
financial ramifications of that?
If you advise a client to—or if your client wants to—Fix the Time to Which to Adjourn, pause and consider the unintended consequences of continuing a meeting . Your clients will be better served by stopping and asking about those unknown implications .
As to the written opinions, the two parliamentarians were in agreement and relieved to be so . The client was not quite as happy gathering the “old” group together, convening the (adjourned/continued) annual meeting, considering the bylaw amendments, and finally adjourning so that new directors could elect the necessary officers . NP
Miriam G. simmons, PrP, joined NAP in 2014 . She is a past president of the Minnesota State Association of Parliamentarians and a member of the St Paul Unit She currently serves on the NAP Youth Committee
C.J. Cavin, PrP, is a licensed Oklahoma attorney and a credentialed parliamentarian C .J . has obtained the Certified Professional Parliamentarian-Teacher credential from the American Institute of Parliamentarians and the Professional Registered Parliamentarian credentials from the National Association of Parliamentarians
He is the Chief Parliamentarian for the Oklahoma House of Representatives, the NAP Parliamentarian, the former Chair of the NAP Commission on Credentialing, the former AIP Parliamentarian, the President for the American College of Parliamentary Lawyers, and president of the Oklahoma State Association of Parliamentarians He also served on the authorship team for the American Institute of Parliamentarians Standard Code, Second Edition .
Many people, even some parliamentarians, have trouble with the idea of motion classification, especially for secondary motions . What are the secondary motions? Is this classification of any use? What do all these different classes do?
Secondary motions are subsidiary motions, privileged motions, and incidental motions . This classification is very useful for learning about motions and how they function, and can even help when looking them up in Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised, (RONR, all citations will be from the 12th edition), as the book places each motion in a separate section . The third question—what do they do?—is a bit more complex, but not overly so . Subsidiary motions relate to other pending motions . Privileged motions relate to the assembly as an assembly, or to the members of the assembly as members . Incidental motions relate to the situation .
Subsidiary motions apply to another pending motion and deal with how that motion is handled (6:3) . For example, the subsidiary motion to amend will change the wording of the motion (6:5, 2) . A motion to commit will send the motion to a committee (6:5, 3) . A motion to lay on the table temporarily
stops consideration of the pending question (6:5, 7) .
All of these motions apply to a pending motion . Sometimes, it is a main motion, but it may apply to another type of motion . For example, a motion to commit may be amended; the amendment, when adopted, might change the committee to which it is sent (13:7, 6) . They can also apply to other types of secondary motions . For example, the privileged motion recess may be amended as to the length of the recess (20:5, 6) .
Privileged motions deal with the assembly as an assembly or of its members as members of that assembly . For example, a privileged motion to recess provides a “short intermission” in a meeting of the assembly (6:12, 3) . A motion to fix the time to which to adjourn sets the time and place for the assembly to continue its meeting (6:12, 5) .
It is the privileged motion Raise a Question of Privilege that deals with the individual members as members via a “question of personal privilege . ” More common, however, are questions of privilege relating to the assembly as a whole . In the case of the former, this might be the member addressing rumors that, if true, could result in his removal . In the latter case, this might be something like adjusting the heating
pending motion . They take precedence over the pending motion and usually, but not always, must be dealt with before business can continue (6:18) . For example, a parliamentary inquiry made in regard to a main motion would take precedence over the main motion (33: 2, 2) .
Incidental motions are the class of secondary motions with the most motions, but there are four general groupings1 within this class . These are:
A
. Motions relating to the applicability of the rules (6:17, 1-3), like a point of order;
D
(6:17, 7-9); and
. Motions that are requests, like a request for information (6:17, 10-11) .
All of these informal groupings, however, do relate to some other situation within the meeting .
Understanding the classification of secondary motions can make it easier to understand the function of each particular motion in that class .
Knowing the class of the motion may make it easier to find the details of that motion . That can be helpful to both the novice and seasoned parliamentarian . NP
eND NOtes
1 There are incidental motions not listed in this section, such a motion to create blanks (t10, 21) and a motion to dispense with the reading of the minutes (t18, 50) These do not fit into the general subcategories, but are clearly incidental motions
WOrks CIteD
Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised, 12th Edition Eds Henry M Robert, III, William J . Evans, Daniel H . Honemann, Thomas J . Balch, Daniel E . Seabold, Shmuel Gerber, New York: Public Affairs, 2020
Jonathan M. Jacobs, rP, is the former president of the Pennsylvania Association of Parliamentarians and the Delaware Valley Unit
We are all aware of the famous Teddy Roosevelt adage, “Speak softly and carry a big stick—you will go far . ’” But if TR were a member of NAP, might he have said, “Speak softly and carry a big gavel”? When you chair a meeting or help someone preside at a meeting, do you use a big gavel? Do you even possess a gavel? What does RONR (12th ed .) say about the use of a gavel?
Believe it or not, the word “gavel” is mentioned only four times as a noun in the entire text of RONR (not counting the Index) and twice as a verb as in “gaveling through . ” Surprisingly, the word “gavel” does not appear on any of the pages in RONR In Brief (RIB), not even in the Index . But let’s look at those six RONR references to see where and how a gavel is, or is not, used:
1 . When a motion to recess is adopted, “the chair announces the results as follows: The ayes have it and the meeting stands recessed [or in recess] for fifteen minutes [rapping once with the gavel, if desired]” (20:9) . Did you notice that this use of the gavel is not even mandatory? The chair may use the gavel if desired .
2 . “The adjournment may be signaled by a single rap of the gavel, if
desired” (21:20) Again, the use of a gavel is not mandatory .
3 . “Under no circumstances should the chair attempt to drown out a disorderly member—either by his own voice or the gavel—or permit himself to be drawn into a verbal duel” (61:9) . Note the hint about using, or not using, a gavel in a particular way .
4 . “If there is to be a formal installation of officers, this ceremony is often made a part of a closing banquet meeting, at which any presentations of gavels, pins, awards, or the like are also made” (59:55(12)) . This just mentions the physical gavel without any acknowledgement of its actual use .
The other two references are metaphoric uses of “gaveling through” a measure:
5 . “It should be noted that, under legitimate parliamentary procedure, there is no such thing as ‘gaveling through’ a measure” (43:7) .
6 . “So, if the chair ignores a member seeking the floor while entitled to it, ignores a properly made nondilatory motion, ‘gavels through’ a motion in an improper attempt to cut off debate, or violates any other rule, any member may immediately raise a Point of Order” (62:4) .
In addition to those six occurrences found in RONR, there is also a seventh in-text reference to the use of a gavel without actually using the word “gavel”: “If a member commits only a slight breach of order—such as addressing another member instead of the chair in debate, or, in a single instance, failing to confine his remarks to the merits of the pending question— the chair simply raps lightly, points out the fault, and advises the member to avoid it” (61:10) . It’s obvious here that it would be a gavel that the chair uses to rap, which is a different use for it than calling a recess or adjourning a meeting . In all these cases, a single rap is called for in RONR . That’s it, straight out of RONR . Outside of the book’s specificity, when is a gavel used in the practical world of meetings? Some chairs (those who even use a gavel) will call a meeting to order with one rap of the gavel and call the meeting back to order with a rap after the expiration of a recess .
Some chairs even rap the gavel to make an action official . None of these are mentioned in RONR but none appear to be prohibited or ruled against . This author, however, when judging a Future Business Leaders of America Parliamentary Procedure (FBLA Parli-Pro) competition, observed a student presiding officer who pounded the gavel ferociously to signal any decision or ruling, such as approving minutes or adopting a motion . To say that it became loud and ponderous would be an understatement .
On a much more subtle level, one chair was observed putting a gavel on the top of the lectern with much fanfare, but never again even touched it throughout the entire meeting . They even left it there at the end of the meeting, and the parliamentarian had to remind the chair to take it with them . Other chairs have been seen lightly tapping with the handle (not the mallet head) to point out minor disturbances or pointing at an offending member with the handle and shaking it in a “no-no” motion without even rapping it .
Let’s look at other gavel uses involving multiple raps certainly foreign to RONR . A Future Farmers of America (FFA) chapter in the Midwest has the following in their procedural manual concerning the use of a gavel by the chapter’s president:
1 . One tap of the gavel follows the announcement of adjournment .
2 . One tap of the gavel is a message to members to be seated .
3 . Two taps of the gavel calls the meeting to order .
4 . Three taps of the gavel is the signal for all members to stand in unison .
5 . A series of taps is used to restore order at a meeting .
An unnamed religious congregation added a fourth rap to signal that members should kneel to pray .
We all know the usual shape and form of a gavel, but have you ever seen one not so traditional? Are you aware that the Hawaii State House of Representatives uses a poi pounder as its gavel? The U .S . Senate uses an ivory mallet head without a handle . During the late ‘70s, a certain Toastmasters Club used a saltshaker as its gavel to recognize the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) that were taking place at the time . This author has seen presiding officers use many different items at their disposal to rap, from pens to mugs to rocks; and one chair would even tap on the microphone to create an electronic gavel sound .
Some commentaries about gavels have indicated that the use of a gavel is going out of style as gavels are being
used less and less in meetings, hinting that maybe less is better . Is a gavel more ceremonial than practical? Has your organization forgotten where their gavel even is since it’s neglected and not passed along from pastpresident to new president? It may be up to individual readers of this article to make up their own minds as to whether a gavel should start making a comeback as a visual symbol of authority to support an orderly meeting . As for this author, he even has a Zoom background showing a gavel and uses an actual gavel on camera, bringing it down in the Zoom view and tapping it on the table next to the computer to signal calling a meeting to order, recessing and adjourning . But, no, he doesn’t “wham” the gavel down with heavy-handed force at every instance of a ruling!
If you would like to do your due diligence, pull out one of the other parliamentary authorities (Demeter’s Manual of Parliamentary Law and Procedure or the American Institute of Parliamentarians Standard Code) and see what they have to say about the chair’s use of a gavel during a meeting—single raps, multiple raps, no raps? And now, this article is adjourned…with one rap! NP
September 5-8, 2024
• San Antonio, Texas
Come experience the NAP Training Conference in San Antonio, Texas, September 5-8, 2024 . Join parliamentarians from across the U .S . and Canada to learn, connect, and relax along the beautiful River Walk . Choose from more than 30 educational sessions and practice labs to strengthen your parliamentary skills . Forge new friendships and nurture old ones . Top it off by exploring San Antonio, a city that offers rich history, culture, and local cuisine to appreciate and enjoy . Plan to come early or stay late— there is so much to see and do!
September 5-8, 2024
San Antonio, Texas
Founded in 1718 when the Mission San Antonio de Valero, later known as the Alamo, was established, this remarkable city’s past is evident in the architecture and culture throughout the city . It is home to five UNESCO World Heritage Sites comprised of four mission complexes in the beautiful Missions National Historical Park . The Alamo mission is the fifth UNESCO site and is a short, 6-minute walk from the Hilton Palacio del Rio Since its founding, San Antonio has developed into a vibrant center for art, dining, and revelry .
San Antonio has seemingly endless options for those looking to experience the city’s culture . Around the corner from the hotel is the Briscoe Western Art Museum where the stories and traditions of the American West still live . Venture north to browse the San Antonio Museum of Art or catch a show at the historical Majestic Theater Neighboring our hotel is the La Villita Historic Arts Village, a restored Spanish village It is a must-go place for handmade goods and dining .
A foodie’s dream, San Antonio’s food scene is influenced by many cultures, designating it a UNESCO Creative City of Gastronomy
Be sure to hit one of the San Antonio Food Trails for tacos and BBQ . If you’re feeling thirsty, drift down the Margarita Trail . The conference welcome reception will be hosted at the historic Maverick Distillery, just steps away from The Alamo .
The 2024 NTC Workshop Coordinators are putting together a tremendous educational experience for parliamentarians of all levels .
The program will be chock-full of talented presenters and material for every academic taste within NAP . There will be five classroom experiences scheduled each day, which means there will be programming during every meal (all are included in your registration)
Festivities kick off Thursday with a luncheon celebrating our members and then the Welcome Reception at Maverick Distilling Thursday evening The focus turns to education on Friday and Saturday with dozens of workshops designed to develop and refine your parliamentary edge .
There are offerings for all experience levels: beginning, intermediate, and advanced . Plus, registrants will have access to the recordings from all workshops (excluding the practice labs) for 90 days after the conference .
Credentialed members may earn 12 CEUs for the live event, and an additional 1 .25 CEUs for each recording viewed .
September 5-8, 2024
San Antonio, Texas
sC he D u L e at a G L a NC e
Schedule is subject to change
See napuniversity.com for the latest information.
PrP CertIFICatION eXaM & reNeWaL
Separate registration required through the NAP Portal Events
PrP CertIFICatION eXaM
Tuesday, September 3, 2024 – 8:00 a m -5:00 p m
Wednesday, September 4, 2024 – 8:00 a .m .-5:00 p .m .
Schedule subject to change.
See napuniversity.com for the latest information.
* Separate registration required.
Wednesday, september 4, 2024
9:00 a m -4:00 p m – NAP Board of Directors Meeting
3:00 p m -6:30 p m – Registration Open
thursday, september 5, 2024
8:30 a .m .-6:00 p .m . – Registration & Bookstore Open
11:45 a m -1:00 p m – Lunch: Celebrating Our Members
Friday, september 6, 2024
7:30 a .m .-9:00 a .m . – Buffet Breakfast
8:00 a .m .-5:00 p .m . – Registration & Bookstore Open
9:00 a .m .-10:15 a .m . – Workshops
10:30 a .m .-11:45 a .m . – Workshops
12:00 p .m .-1:45 p .m . – Lunch: For the Good of the Order
2:00 p .m .-3:15 p .m . – Workshops
3:30 p .m .-4:45 p .m . – Workshops
5:00 p .m .-6:00 p .m . – NAPEF Annual Meeting
6:15 p .m .-9:30 p .m . – District Meetings
saturday, september 7, 2024
7:30 a .m .-9:00 a .m . – Buffet Breakfast
8:00 a .m .-5:00 p .m . – Registration & Bookstore Open
9:00 a .m .-10:15 a .m . – Workshops
10:30 a .m .-11:45 a .m . – Workshops
12:00 p .m .-1:30 p .m . – Lunch (On your own)
1:45 p .m .-3:00 p .m . – Workshops
3:15 p .m .-4:30 p .m . – Workshops
4:45 p .m .-5:00 p .m . – Closing Ceremony
5:30 p .m .-8:30 p .m . – NAPEF Fundraiser – Riverwalk Cruise and Dinner at Casa Rio (Ticketed event, pre-registration required)*
sunday, september 8, 2024
7:30 a .m .-9:00 a .m . – Buffet Breakfast
Schedule is subject to change
See napuniversity.com for the latest information.
PrP CertIFICatION eXaM & reNeWaL
Separate registration required through the NAP Portal Events
PrP reNeWaL CertIFICatION
Sunday, September 8, 2024 – 8:00 a m -5:00 p m
Monday, September 9, 2024 – 8:00 a m -5:00 p m
September 5-8, 2024
San Antonio, Texas
The historic hilton Palacio del rio is the site of this years’ conference . Located right on the San Antonio River Walk, you will be just steps from the best shopping and dining San Antonio has to offer . Not to mention, the River Walk cruises load right outside! The Palacio del Rio offers several dining options including a café, sports bar featuring South-Texas cuisine, and an Irish pub
room rates start at $149 (plus taxes) for single and double occupancy Reserve online through NAP University or over the phone by calling 210.270.0751 .
Be sure to say you are with the National Association of Parliamentarians 2024 NTC to receive the discounted rates!
Rates are effective Saturday August 31, through Sunday, September 8 the reservation deadline is tuesday, august 6, 2024.
San Antonio International Airport is 8 miles from the Hilton Palacio del Rio .
Visit napuniversity.com for information regarding transportation to and from the airport.
For those driving, valet parking is available onsite for an extra fee; the hotel does not offer self-parking
hilton Palacio del rio 200 S . Alamo St . • San Antonio, TX 78205
Registering for the 2024 National Training Conference is easy
Choose one of these convenient, secure options:
• Register online through NAP University
• Register by mail or fax using the enclosed registration form
• Register by calling 816 833 3892
Whichever method you use, be sure to register early and save!
Requests for refund of conference fees must be received in writing by NAP Headquarters no later than august 24, 2024 .
A $75 cancellation fee will apply No refunds will be issued for no-shows or cancellations received after August 24, 2024
A $30 handling fee will be assessed for all returned checks .
Conference registration fees include lunch and the Welcome Reception on Thursday, buffet breakfast and lunch on Friday and Saturday; and access to speaker handouts and updates through NAP University .
Can you spot the parliamentary blunders in the following stories?
BLUNDER #1
During a November assembly of a local sports club, a contentious issue arose about changing the club’s uniform colors . A member, frustrated with the lack of progress, shouted out, without recognition, “I call for the question!” The chair announced that the question had been called and moved directly to a vote on the main issue . Where was the blunder?
BLUNDER #2
During the January meeting of a local historical society, which holds monthly regular meetings, a member introduced a motion to organize a series of public lectures on the town’s history . During the debate, another member suggested postponing the motion to the March meeting, citing the need for more information on potential speakers, and the motion was seconded . The chair stated the question on the motion which, after debate, was adopted . Where was the blunder?
Answers are on page 31.
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 the most recent edition of Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised, unless otherwise indicated, and do not take into account such governing authorities as statutes, bylaws, adopted special rules of order, other parliamentary authorities, or earlier editions, except as specifically mentioned .
The abbreviations used in these questions and answers are explained in National Parliamentarian Vol . 85, No . 1, Fall 2023, p . 30 .
Questions should be emailed to npquestions@nap2.org.
Our January meeting was jam packed with important business items and the members postponed five items that they thought were less important to the February meeting. Two items, A and B, which were postponed in that order, had been postponed from the December meeting to the January meeting and were listed as general orders at that meeting. Three other postponed items were all new business at the January meeting and were postponed in the order they were introduced: C, D, and E.
At the February meeting, the president decided that the motions postponed from January were more pressing and started out with them as soon as we reached general orders. Some members really wanted to discuss A and B and thought they were more important. When the president started with C, they were not prepared to respond, but after D was under discussion, they realized what was happening and someone called for the orders of the day. The president ruled the Call for the Orders of the Day out of order and continued with the discussion of E. That did not seem fair to the members who felt that A and B were more important. We thought that a Call for the Orders of the Day was a privileged motion and therefore ranked higher than a pending main motion. Our parliamentary authority is RONR (12th ed.). Is the president right?
Yes and no
. The president is right that the Call for the Orders of the Day was out of order at the time that it was made . That is because a Call for the Orders
of the Day cannot be raised in the middle of discussion of another main motion when the call is made to bring up a general order . RONR (12th ed .) 18:4 (1), 18:5 . In other words, a Call for the Orders of the Day cannot be raised to interrupt a main motion unless it is made to call up a special order . The president is wrong, on the other hand, because she did not bring up the postponed motions in the proper order . If the Call for the Orders of the Day had been made before the chair stated the question on motion C or D, then it would have been properly made and could have been used to call up A and then B before C, D, and E . In this case, after D is disposed of, a member could call for the orders of the day at any time until the chair states the question on E . The Call for the Orders of the Day can interrupt when the motion is in order, so the call could be raised when the president starts to state the question on E, in case the member is surprised when the chair states the wrong motion .
The reason that the president is wrong about the order in which the motions were handled should be raised . General orders that are made without reference to a specific time to be taken up are taken up in the order made at the prior meeting from which the motions were postponed . RONR (12th ed .) 41:23 .
All five motions fall in 41:23 category (d), general orders, matters reached at the prior meeting and specifically postponed to the current meeting . As A and B were general orders at the January meeting originally made at the December meeting, they should have been reached before C, D, and E (which were all new business in January) . Therefore, the order of consideration under general orders should have been A, B, C, D, and E, in that order . Note that motions postponed as general orders at the previous meeting are “taken [up] in the order in which they were made,” id . (emphasis added), not the order in which they were postponed . In this case, that does not make a difference .
But the order made versus order postponed could make a difference in other circumstances . For example, Motion C, one of the new motions postponed in January, could have been a recommendation of a special committee . It would have been reached (and therefore postponed) earlier in the January meeting than A and B, which were general orders . RONR (12th ed .) 41:17, 41:23 (d) . Nevertheless, C was not made until January, and A and B were first made in December . Therefore, the December motions come first in February under 41:23 (d) . The order of the general orders in February would still be A, B, C, D, and E .
It should also be noted that, because of the January postponement, A and B are in a somewhat worse position at the February meeting than if they had
not been reached at all at the January meeting . If they had not been reached at all, they would have been unfinished business under category (c) at the February meeting, RONR (12th ed .) 41:23 (c), and would have come before any of the general orders 41:23 (d) . Regardless, A and B clearly should have been reached before C, D, or E because of the order in which they were made at previous meetings . A Call for the Orders of the Day to raise consideration of A or B would have been timely if made at any time after the disposition of a main motion and before the president completed stating the question on the next .
QQUESTION:
I am part of a small community association board of nine members. Each year after the annual association meeting, the bylaws require the board of directors to hold an organizational meeting of the board to elect the officers for the year (until after the next annual meeting). We are precluded from voting by secret ballot since our bylaws require us to record the vote of board members on motions in the minutes. When we’ve had a contested officer election, we followed the instructions for a viva-voce election RONR (12th ed.) 46:37–41, with a counted raised hand vote, but none of us like voting against an earlier nominee in order to elect a later nominee. Is there another method we could use?
ANSWER:
It is understandable from the perspective of interpersonal relations that members often do not like voting against nominees . It has a harsher appearance than simply voting for someone else, even if the effect is the same . In fact if a vote is taken by ballot, members would not be voting against any nominees . RONR (12th ed .) 46:31-36 . Additionally, RONR (12th ed .) 46:39 recommends against using a viva-voce election for officers because that method may provide an advantage to earlier nominees .
An alternate method is handling the election of officers by roll call vote . RONR (12th ed .) 46:42 indicates that it may be unusual, but elections may be held by roll call . Elections by roll call follow the same procedure as elections by ballot . Members would declare their vote for each office when they are called in the roll of voting for that office . If this method is employed, members could state the name of their desired nominee, rather than having
to vote no on any candidates nominated prior to their preferred candidate . The secretary would record and repeat each member’s vote and assist the presiding officer in announcing the number of votes for each nominee, and declaring the election for each office (if the necessary votes are achieved for election) .
Another alternative is a signed ballot, which is equivalent to a “written” roll call . RONR (12th ed .) 45:46 . Ballots are cast by board members as they would be in a secret ballot election, but the ballots are not secret and must be signed . The report of the vote attributes each vote to the respective board member, just as if the vote were held by roll call, but considerable time is saved by not going through the verbal roll call . A potential downside is that some members, being more familiar with traditional ballot election, neglect to sign their ballots, therefore invalidating the vote . To avoid that problem, some organizations prepare signed ballots in advance for each voting member with that member’s name on it .
QQUESTION:
Our neighborhood organization has always met at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesdays. In our town, most families had finished dinner by then, and often walked over to the neighborhood clubhouse together for the meeting. Now, more and more of our members commute into the city for work and drive straight to meetings without having eaten beforehand. They bring messy (and sometimes smelly) take-out containers and eat and drink throughout the meeting. It is very distracting from the business of the meeting. RONR (12th ed.) is our parliamentary authority. Does RONR say anything about eating or drinking during meetings.
ANSWER:
RONR (12th ed .) does not discuss eating or drinking during meetings . Because there are so many different kinds of organization, each organization has its own needs in regard to food and meetings . In most organizations, meals take place during recesses or after adjournment . See RONR (12th ed .) 41:64; Demeter, pp . 103–04 . Some organizations, however, actually conduct business during a group meal . Others provide snacks in the back of the room . Some sell homemade baked goods as a fundraiser before the meeting
and expect members to eat discreetly during the meeting, particularly if members are seated around tables during the meetings .
In most business meetings, the expectation is that there will be no eating during a meeting because, in the context, other members who are not eating might find the sounds, smells, and crumbs associated with eating (especially when there are no tables) disturbing . Drinking discreetly is more commonly observed in business meetings . In many groups, water bottles are even provided during long meetings . If water is available to those seated on the dais, members should be allowed to drink discreetly as well out of a sense of fairness . It depends on the custom of the group .
The underlying principle is that meetings should not be disturbed by the conduct of individual members . That is the principle behind the rule against disturbing the meeting by whispering during speeches . RONR (12th ed .) 43:28; AIPSC (2nd ed .) 11 .29 . Eating or drinking that is causing a disturbance could rise to an issue warranting a question of privilege, RONR (12th ed .) 19:7, but usually such situations can be handled informally by a brief comment from another member . If the issue of food during the meeting is causing a significant problem for other members, the organization could consider adopting a special rule prohibiting eating during meetings .
In deference to the fact that members eating during the meeting are returning from long commutes without having eaten beforehand, the group might want to consider allowing limited eating only to those seated at a table provided at the back of the room (so long is this does not disturb the other members), or changing the meeting time to later, or meeting on a weekend . No time or day of the week will ever be optimum for everyone, and accommodations should be made to ensure the active participation of as many members as possible at meetings .
What’s Wrong?
from page 25
BLUNDER #1
The member must seek recognition before moving the Previous Question, and the motion requires a second . After the motion was moved and seconded, the chair would then take a vote on the Previous Question . If adopted by a 2/3 vote, the assembly would then proceed to a direct vote on the motion(s) for which the previous question was ordered . See RONR (12th ed .) 16:7 .
BLUNDER #2
A motion cannot be postponed beyond the end of the next regular session . The motion could have been postponed to the February meeting, but not the March meeting . See RONR (12th ed .) 14:6 .
https://twitter com/ napparlypro
https://fb com/ parliamentarians/
N e W re GI stere D P ar LI a M e N tar I a N s *
NAP congratulates the following individuals on becoming Registered Parliamentarians:
Gerry Prince (AB)
sIL e N t GaV e L s*
Robert Slattery (MI)
NAP commemorates members who have passed from our midst; may they rest in peace:
Carlene Burke (NY)
TennieBee Hall (CA)
Patricia Howard (OR)
Donald Jacobberger (CA)
Dawn Kelley (MB)
Ben Kerr (CA)
Carolyn Maupin (NV)
David Meigel (CA)
Patricia Renau (FL)
Lydon Swartzendruber (IA)
NAP welcomes the following individuals as new members:
Michael Bernard (NY)
Melissa Berry (TN)
Catherine Bouchard (AB)
Dan Brackmann (SC)
Dennis Brancato (NY)
Antoinette Brooks (MD)
Chenay Brown (GA)
Fiona Buchanan (SC)
Oliver Burton (BC)
Cheryl Chisholm (EL)
Rasheeda Cleveland (SC)
Stephen Clough (VA)
John Corso-Esquivel (NC)
Larry Daberko (PA)
Shelly Davis Jones (IL)
Mohith Gajjela (TX)
Titus Gregory (BC)
Joe Hagerty (NE)
Karen Horner (TX)
Evan Hudson-Plush (NJ)
Annette Johnson (CO)
Franklin Johnson (MD)
Kimberly Kelley (SC)
Terry Mahaffey (NC)
Anne Marie McClure (CA)
Dionne McKenzie (GA)
Jason Miller (OH)
Leila Moneypenny (GA)
Judit Nagy (BC)
Monique Pace (NJ)
Matt Patton (AR)
Darlene Price (GA)
Megan Robertson (OH)
Linda Rose (KY)
Charles Scruggs (NY)
Michael Seebeck (AL)
Cynthia Simien (GA)
Jane Simpson (NY)
Jonathan Singer (ON)
Jonathan Sink (NC)
Donna Smith (TX)
Amber Smith-Bush (MS)
Leigh Haislip Spencer (MT)
Drew Stewart (WA)
Mark Stratton (IN)
Mary Stroh (VA)
Robin Thomas (NJ)
Michael Tiedeman (NE)
Daniel Tirone (LA)
Benjamin Tischler (BC)
Michael Vestal (TN)
Devon Wallace (NC)
Bruce Yu (ON)
thank you instructors!
A special thank you to the instructors of the aforementioned new members:
Todd Brand
Kay Crews
Donna Mitchell
Deborah Underwood
Karen Watson
* For the period December 15, 2023 through March 15, 2024
What better way to wrap up the 2024 NAP Training Conference (NTC) than with a boat ride along the Riverwalk culminating in a classic Tex-Mex buffet dinner at the historic Casa Rio!
Sign up for the NAPEF Fundraiser when you register for the NAP Training Conference . Tickets are $130 and include the boat ride and dinner .
Join your fellow attendees to celebrate and reflect on all that you learned and discovered in San Antonio
It promises to be a fun, relaxing evening for all!