National Parliamentarian (Vol. 79, No. 2)

NP

National Parliamentarian Volume 79, No. 2 | Winter 2018

What’s in it for you?

Introducing RONR to China page 5 Habits VS Customs page 14 Time Savers page 20

NP Parliamentary Resources

2017-2019 NAP Officers

at Your Fingertips

President James N. Jones, PRP

There is only one place to turn for your parliamentary resources: NAP.

Secretary Kevin R. Connelly, PRP

Browse our online store for

Directors-at-Large Joyce Brown-Watkins, PRP Ann Rempel, PRP Alison Wallis, PRP

• Parliamentary reference cards • Basic information handouts • Script samples • Leadership primers for officers • Credentialing study guides

Treasurer Wanda M. Sims, PRP

District Director Representatives Roger Hanshaw, PRP Larry Martin, PRP Parliamentarian James H. Stewart, PRP Executive Director Cynthia Launchbaugh

• Teaching resources • And so much more

Check us out today at

www.parliamentarians.org

Volume 79, No. 2 | Winter 2018

Contents

Vice-President Darlene T. Allen, PRP

• Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised and In Brief – we offer spiral-bound versions not available anywhere else!

National Parliamentarian

NAP’s Vision: To provide parliamentary leadership to the world

From the Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 President’s Message NAP: What’s in it for you? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Features 19th Century U.S. Manual Basis for Chinese Grassroots Democracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 The AIP Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure: The Unannounced Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Bad Habit or Established Custom? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 RONR and Church Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 The 10 Best Time Savers in RONR (Part 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Departments Test Yourself The Decimal System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Parliamentary Procedure Vocabulary Builder . . . . . . . . . . .

Questions & Answers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Answer Key . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NAP Connections New Educational Opportunities Coming in 2018 . . . . . . .

NAP Committee Updates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Call for Nominations for NAP Educational Foundation Trustee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

District One Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NYAP: Looking Back with Pride – Looking Ahead with Excitement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Rising STAR Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

In Memoriam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Professional Registered Parliamentarians . . . . . . . . .

New Registered Parliamentarians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NAP New Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

In Memorial • Lorraine Buckley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . www.parliamentarians.org

22 23 25 28 29 30 32 33 34 36 37 37 37 38 39 1

National Parliamentarian

Official publication of the National Association of Parliamentarians® 213 S. Main Street • Independence, MO 64050-3808 816.833.3892 • 888.627.2929 hq@nap2.org • www.parliamentarians.org

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 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 “Assign and Transfer Copyright” form with their submission, granting NAP the copyright or permission to publish.

Submission Deadlines

Volume 79, No. 3 (Spring 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . February 1, 2018 Volume 79, No. 4 (Summer 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . May 1, 2018 Volume 80, No., 1 . . . . . . . . August 1, 2018 (Fall 2018)

Editor

Ann Iona Warner npeditor@nap2.org

Assistant Editor

Betty Tunstall, PRP

Parliamentary Review Committee Schmuel Gerber, PRP Paul McClintock, PRP

Parliamentary Research Committee Michael Malamut, PRP C. Alan Jennings, PRP Jim Stewart, PRP Helen McFadden, PRP

NATIONAL PARLIAMENTARIAN®

(Registered U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, ISSN 8755-7592) Published quarterly by the National Association of Parliamentarians ©2018 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 those endorsed by NAP.

Subscription and change-of-address requests should be directed to NAP at the above address.

Annual subscription: $30 • Single copy: $8

From the Editor

When the last issue of the National Parliamentarian was being prepared, multiple hurricanes were inundating areas of our country. As this issue is being prepared, we are preparing for an arctic blast and blizzards.

While I hope this is not a weather trend, it seems somewhat appropriate to be working on parliamentary items while listening to disaster news.

Parliamentarians are frequently called in when an organizational disaster has occurred.

This issue offers tips to help avoid disasters, as well as tips for getting out of potentially difficult situations. There is also a look at the growth of parliamentary procedure in China. An article on American Institute of Parliamentarians Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure offers a glimpse at another parliamentary authority which you may not be aware of.

Ann Warner 2 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

President’s Message

®

NAP: What’s in it for you?

As the first quarter of this administration’s two-year term comes to a close, let me provide some insight into where NAP is headed.

Much of the groundwork for the future of our organization began with the adoption of the 2007 Strategic Plan. Though this plan has been updated and enlarged under succeeding presidents, its basic focus remains unchanged, even today.

Education, Membership, Public Awareness, and Financial Stability remain the cornerstones of our organization.

During this administration, we will continue to move our organization forward through: • Enhancing our technology systems to develop a robust online and on-demand learning system to supplement an expanded facilitated-learning program; • Instituting significant improvements to our internal and external communication channels; • Growing our non-dues revenue and potential membership streams through creative organizational partnerships; • Enabling unit and association excellence by providing better support at the local level; • Increasing brand recognition and advancing professional development opportunities to aid our credentialed members in their professional growth; and • Encouraging global connectedness to grow our international presence.

All of this sounds good, but the obvious (and understandable) question is “What’s in it for me?” During the current biennium, NAP will invest in programs directly related to the needs of our members: • A new online Knowledge Center with expanded and improved on-demand educational offerings that are ready when you are; www.parliamentarians.org

3

• A new Affinity Program designed to save members money; • The Great Governance Series, an innovative, advanced educational series done in partnership with some of our country’s most prestigious law schools; • A new standardized subscription-based learning tool available for use by units, study groups, or Members at Large.

• A new Association Relations Committee tasked with developing strong, ongoing partnerships with our local leaders.

These are just a few of the activities this administration will undertake to enhance and improve the NAP member experience.

Our goal is to ensure that when you reflect on NAP to determine “What’s in it for me?” you will always recognize the following: • Value • Education • Support • Resources • Friendships I am excited and optimistic about what lies ahead for NAP during this biennium. I look forward to sharing this journey with you as we continue to build on our successes and recognize our possibilities.

James “Jim” Jones PRP, CPP-T 44th NAP President, 2017-2019

4 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

19th Century U.S. Manual Basis for Chinese Grassroots Democracy

by Dong Heng

This article was originally published on Sixth Tone and is published with permission. http://www.sixthtone.com/news/1385/ 19th-century-us-manual-basis-chinese-grassroots-democracy

When 60-year-old retiree Tan Shengbo was elected to his neighborhood’s local People’s Congress in 2014, he expected run-of-the-mill bureaucratic drudgery: pushing papers and rubber-stamping government orders. Instead, he found himself part of a flowering experiment in grassroots democracy.

He was chosen as a representative for Peace Community, a housing block in Shenzhen no more than a stone’s throw away from Hong Kong, in southern China’s Guangdong province. But before the newly convened assembly could call their first meeting, they’d first have to get acquainted with Robert’s Rules of Order, a manual on parliamentary procedure.

The implementation of these meeting rules has made the congresses in Shenzhen’s Luohu District more efficient and democratic. In fact, they’ve been so effective that Jiang Derong, chief of the community’s workstation, says he feels a new pressure to carry out the congress’s wishes. Previously, he told Sixth Tone, the workstation would just dictate decisions.

Robert’s Rules of Order was authored in the 19th century by Henry Martyn Robert, an American army engineer who, having previously dealt with the military’s sluggish decision-making process, was inspired to create a set of rules for guiding stalled church meetings. In 1876 he published a book called the Pocket Manual of Rules of Order for Deliberative Assemblies.

These guidelines have since been used the world over to conduct meetings where everyone has equal rights to speak, bring motions, and vote. The person to bring them to China was Yuan Tianpeng. www.parliamentarians.org

5

19th Century U.S. Manual Basis for Chinese Grassroots Democracy

continued

Soon after Yuan first stepped into the University of Alaska as a freshman in 1999, he decided to join the student union. He was handed a copy of Robert’s Rules after being elected a student senator, and after he witnessed them in practice at meetings, he was sold.

“It was totally new to me, and I thought it was a good way to solve problems in a group setting,” Yuan, who continues to advocate for instituting the framework in China, told Sixth Tone.

On his return to China in 2003, Yuan started working at a Chinese company, a shift he said left him disappointed. “My partners in the company always masked their intentions by digressing to unrelated topics. They favored backroom deals to maximize their interests,” Yuan said. “Why couldn’t they show respect for the rules and let them guide us through arguments and to compromise?”

Yuan Tianpeng attending an awards ceremony for China’s young leaders, Beijing, June 15, 2012.

Yang Dengfeng/ VCG

Yuan figured that if Chinese elites couldn’t even realize the value of rules, how could the rest of the country? He decided to teach Robert’s Rules across China and spent the next year translating the text into Chinese.

He’s since led training classes at hundreds of institutions, including the Ministry of Commerce. Despite the success, he wasn’t entirely sure these one-off training sessions were actually as effective as he hoped, and he went on the lookout for longer-running projects.

That’s when he met Lu Yi. Lu is the director of the civil affairs bureau of Luohu District in Shenzhen, where Peace Community is located. Part of his job is to oversee the district’s roughly 115 community congresses. Every three years, residents over the age of 18 can vote for representatives.

But Lu felt their monthly meetings were chaotic.

6 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

According to Lu, just getting congress members to sit down and speak calmly was a struggle. He said they were more adept at bickering than at expressing their views diplomatically. “At first, we thought they just lacked decorum and communication skills,” he said. Lu invited public speaking experts to give trainings, but to no avail. “We realized we needed a mechanism that could fundamentally reshape their thinking,” he said.

“At first, to me democracy just meant hand-raising, and the majority winning the day,” Lu said. “But there’s more to learn and change before implementing democratic governance.” In 2013 he invited Yuan to teach Luohu District’s congresses how to hold meetings under Robert’s Rules.

For congress member Tan, it took a while for the training to sink in. “At first, we didn’t know what to say, as we were all used to traditional community meetings,” Tan told Sixth Tone. In the past, he and other residents were just called up by the government as “resident representatives” to be yes-men for an already-completed plan for their community. “It was just a formality,” Tan said.

“Then Yuan Tianpeng came and taught us terms like ‘proposal’ and ‘second the motion.’ We were interested. We never imagined a meeting could be run this way,” Tan said, adding that the most valuable things he learned from Yuan’s classes were the importance of compromise and respecting the rules.

A man stands to voice his opinion during a Peace Community congressional meeting, Shenzhen, July 29, 2016.

Courtesy of Peace Community

Soon everyone was eager to speak up, but that presented a new problem: hurt feelings. Chinese social norms discourage open disagreement, Tan explained, “but being a community congress member means you must be tolerant of disagreement and not take things too personally.” www.parliamentarians.org

7

19th Century U.S. Manual Basis for Chinese Grassroots Democracy

continued

In Yuan’s class, members of congress with conflicting views are given equal opportunity to say their piece. To Tan, these frank exchanges should lead to discovering middle ground. “With compromise,” he said, “both sides win.”

In accordance with Robert’s Rules, the meetings in Luohu District now require that a neutral arbiter with no voting privileges oversee debates. Everyone has a set amount of speaking time, frustrating some when they get cut short after two minutes.

Jiang, the chief of Luohu’s community workstation, is also a little frustrated. Though in theory community congresses present proposals to the stations for implementation, he said that in practice the community workstation actually makes decisions.

But now that the community congress is taking their task more seriously, Jiang has been taking orders from them instead. The reversal has him squeezed on both ends. “I feel I’m under pressure from both the community and upper-level government,” he said.

“For example, if the congress decides to build a small community garden, I must lobby for funds from the upper government,” Jiang said. He worries that the congress will give him a bad score during his annual performance review if he fails to deliver, a situation that could force his resignation.

Even if Jiang gets the government funds, he could be chastised from above if the process takes too long. “This year, the upper government sent me a notice criticizing me for not making efficient use of the congress’s environmental funding and punished me with demerits,” he said.

Still, Jiang thinks things are improving. “In the past, we believed we made decisions in the residents’ best interests, but they didn’t always appreciate it,” he said, adding that if a project didn’t live up to expectations, residents would accuse the government of mismanagement and ignoring people’s interests. But if the people can govern their own decisions and the government plays its role, he said, conflict decreases.

Lu, of the civil affairs bureau, sees other challenges. “The first is whether we can continue this experiment,” he said, explaining that the project’s existence is entirely dependent on the officials’ will.

Wang Jing, Yuan Tianpeng’s chief assistant, agrees. She said they used to conduct similar long-term training for communities in Qinghuai District of Nanjing, the capital of Jiangsu province in eastern China. “We could make it work largely because of the support from a local chief, but when he was transferred, the new 8 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

A Peace Community congressional meeting in Shenzhen, Aug. 1, 2016.

Courtesy of Peace Community

chief thought we were teaching people to challenge the government’s authority and kicked us out,” Wang told Sixth Tone.

Lu is attempting a subtler approach, trying to balance government oversight and interests with grassroots democracy. Lu believes the government can benefit from allowing people to decide some matters for themselves. “Most civil grievances can be resolved if you let people participate in decision-making,” he said.

The other problem rests in China’s political culture. Lu told Sixth Tone that it’s impossible to expect residents to immediately immerse themselves in public affairs. To Lu’s surprise, 90 percent of residents in his district agreed in a past survey that the government should manage everything. “Some people are just used to the government playing babysitter, and that needs to change,” Lu said.

When the project to implement Robert’s Rules first started, Lu said, people could barely hold a discussion. Three years later, though, he’s more optimistic. “We’ve already planted the seed in their minds,” he said. “Sooner or later people here will come to understand both democracy and the order that holds it together.”

2018 NAP Training Conference September 7-9, 2018 Buffalo, NY

www.parliamentarians.org

9

The AIP Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure:

The Unannounced Changes

by Scott M. Burns, PRP

One of my clients will be considering a bylaws revision during its 2018 convention. Their current parliamentary authority is The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure (TSC, 4th ed.). I was about to recommend that they update the parliamentary authority section to the American Institute of Parliamentarians Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure (AIPSC, 1st ed.) when I noticed something. Like Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised (RONR, 11th ed.), TSC requires only a majority vote to suspend a convention standing rule. AIPSC requires a two-thirds vote.

Perhaps that is not an earth-shattering change, but it is an important one to my client because members are accustomed to suspending rules that suddenly become inconvenient, and that is likely to occur at this upcoming convention. More importantly, this change wasn’t among the differences announced when the American Institute of Parliamentarians first published the work, nor has it been mentioned in any of the articles that I have read 10 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

in publications by the National Association of Parliamentarians (NAP) and AIP. Articles published by both organizations focused on new motions, elimination of motions, and greater elucidation of topics that were covered only superficially in TSC. So…what other subtle, unannounced changes might there be? Well, I’ve now compared AIPSC to TSC line-by-line and here they are by AIPSC chapter: Chapter 6 – Processing of Motions (TSC, Chapter 3) a. Adds discussion of addressing members during discussion or debate; steps in voting; restating the question; taking the affirmative vote; taking the negative vote; announcing whether the motion was adopted or defeated; announcing what will happen; introducing the next item of business. While these are not new concepts and are certainly familiar to those whose parliamentary authority is RONR, they were never specifically addressed in TSC.

b. The presiding officer is given the discretion to combine or omit some of the steps for processing a motion. If a point of order is raised, the presiding officer may either correct the situation or simply offer an explanation.

Chapter 8 – Specific Main Motions (TSC, Chapter 7) Provides clearer examples for the motion to ratify and adds that it may also be used to confirm the action or decision of another body that requires such ratification before taking effect.

Chapter 9 – Subsidiary Motions (TSC, Chapter 8) Postpone to a Certain Time. a. A main motion cannot be postponed by delegates at one convention or annual meeting to the next. This is consistent with RONR but was unstated in TSC. b. A main motion may be postponed beyond the next regular meeting to a specific later meeting, but the later meeting must be within the “official year.” An “official year” is imprecisely defined (AIPSC, p. 305) as dating from an event, such as an annual meeting or the beginning of an officer’s term, to the next annual meeting or term.

It is implied that an organization’s official year will be established by a special or standing rule. c. A defeated motion to postpone can be renewed during the same meeting if there is a change in the parliamentary situation.

Chapter 11 – Incidental Motions (TSC, Chapter 10) a. Suspend the rules clarifies that it is not necessary to state the rule to be suspended. This is the same as RONR, but was not expressly stated in TSC. With respect to using this motion to “cut the Gordian Knot” (scrapping everything that has happened to a motion and beginning consideration anew), AIPSC now suggests that in lieu of suspending the rules, which requires a two-thirds vote, the original motion be withdrawn instead. This can be done either with general consent or by a majority vote. Once a motion is withdrawn any member may then introduce a new motion to replace it. b. Consider informally is now included in the chapter on Incidental Motions. TSC covered this subject only within the chapter on Debate (TSC, Chapter 15), and referred to it there as an incidental motion if raised while another motion was already pending.

Chapter 14 – Order of Business and Agenda (TSC, Chapter 14) a. Unless the organization has a rule to the contrary, the use of an adopted agenda does not preclude other items of business from being added, deleted, or moved around during the meeting. An agenda is flexible and may be changed either by general consent or majority vote. www.parliamentarians.org

11

b. Items of business not reached before adjournment do not automatically go to the next meeting as unfinished business, but may be placed on the next meeting’s agenda if needed.

Unfinished business consists only of motions or reports that were pending and interrupted when the meeting adjourned or that were postponed to the later meeting and not set for a special hour.

(In RONR this is called a general order.) c. Adds a thorough discussion of consent agendas and priority agendas.

Chapter 16 Debate (TSC, Chapter 15) The maker of a main motion may speak against his or her motion, although the need to do so should be unusual.

Chapter 19 – Nominations and Elections (TSC, Chapter 18) In TSC, if there were only one candidate for an office, the secretary could be directed by the assembly to cast a single ballot (sometimes referred to as a white ballot) to elect.

AIPSC, instead, allows the presiding officer to conduct the election by either general consent or acclamation unless there is objection.

Chapter 20 – Officers (TSC, Chapter 19) AIPSC reiterates the statement in TSC that officers have the implied power to 12 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

do whatever is necessary to carry out the functions and duties of their offices, but it adds a seemingly inconsistent qualification: “However, when an officer’s powers and duties are listed in the governing documents, the officer has no additional powers or duties except those that arise directly from those listed.” While this is consistent with RONR’s traditional approach, it may be a significant departure for organizations that have relied upon TSC’s greater deference to executive authority.

Chapter 21 – Committees and Boards (TSC, Chapter 20) Unless they are given specific directions, committees may determine their own procedures and levels of formality. Committee members are authorized to do preparatory work in advance of meetings and to discuss issues by email to identify areas of tentative agreement and perform any necessary research or data collection prior to meeting.

Chapter 23 – Conventions and their Committees (TSC, Chapter 22) Unless otherwise provided, convention standing rules are adopted by majority vote and repealed or suspended by a two-thirds vote.

(TSC allows suspension with a majority vote.) If a convention standing rule is repealed, the corresponding rule in AIPSC takes effect.

Chapter 25 – Minutes (TSC, Chapter 23) No substantial changes to former concepts, but greatly expanded discussion with new sections on executive session minutes, committee minutes, minutes approval committees, and action logs.

Chapter 26 – Governing Documents (TSC, Chapter 24) a. Unless already provided by applicable corporate statutes, bylaws should include a provision for disposal of the organization’s assets in the event of dissolution. b. If the bylaws are silent on the vote necessary to amend or revise the bylaws, AIPSC requires that a majority of legal votes cast shall be necessary. If bylaws are silent on notice, AIPSC requires that either notice be given at the previous meeting or with the notice of the meeting at which the amendment(s) or revision will be considered.

Chapter 29 – Rights of Members and Organizations (TSC, Chapter 27) Expressly gives members the right to propose and to vote on amendments to the governing documents; to remain in the organization even when on the losing side of a particular proposition; and, the right to inspect “official records” in addition to the governing documents and minutes. The latter is especially important to incorporated organizations since this is a broader right of inspection than is provided by most state corporation codes.

(TSC, Chapter 29 – “Functioning Under Robert’s Rules of Order” now deleted.)

Chapter 30 – Staff and Consultants (TSC, Chapter 28) Adds discussion of the roles of an executive director and chief financial officer.

Scott Burns, PRP, is a Sacramento, CA, attorney and Professional Registered Parliamentarian. He first developed his practical parliamentary skills as a labor union activist and as a member and officer of a wide variety of non-profit organizations. A member of both NAP and AIP since 1991, Scott has been a Professional Registered Parliamentarian since 2005 with clients ranging from small arts organizations to large labor unions and professional associations. He is also a charter member of the American College of Parliamentary Lawyers. As an attorney, Scott is most called upon for consultations concerning open meeting laws and freedom of information/privacy.

www.parliamentarians.org

13

?

Bad Habit or Established Custom

is raised at any time, the custom falls to the ground, and the conflicting provision in the parliamentary authority or written rule must thereafter be complied with. If it is then desired to follow the former practice, a special rule of order (or, in appropriate circumstances, a standing rule or a bylaw provision) can be added or amended to incorporate it.

by John R. Berg, PRP

“That’s the way we’ve always done it” is an explanation often heard by parliamentarians as to why an organization’s meetings are run the way they are. Most parliamentarians, not wanting to make waves and rock the boat, will simply let it go unless there is a serious violation of the rules that affects members’ rights.

Bad habits are acquired because people tend to learn from watching others without really thinking much about it. Over the years various time wasters and parliamentary errors creep into an organization.

I recall attending one convention for which the bylaws required advance notice before being nominated from the floor. Nevertheless, the chair went through every office asking three times if there were any further nominations, even though it was known that there were none for most offices. I asked the person next to me why that was done.

The response was, “Robert’s Rules must require it.”

That belief actually gives parliamentary procedure an undeserved bad reputation.

Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised (RONR, 11th ed.) is designed to make meetings efficient, not bogged down with unnecessary procedure and formality. If we are going to follow the vision of the National Association of Parliamentarians “to provide parliamentary leadership to the world” we need to be proactive in stamping out such misconceptions.

The current edition of RONR expanded upon the concept of established custom, listing it among the rules of an assembly or organization. Right after standing rules is custom, stating (RONR, p. 19, ll. 2-18): In some organizations, a particular practice may sometimes come to be followed as a matter of established custom so that it is treated practically as if it were prescribed by a rule. If there is no contrary provision in the parliamentary authority or written rules of the organization, the established custom should be adhered to unless the assembly, by a majority vote, agrees in a particular instance to do otherwise.

However, if a customary practice is or becomes in conflict with the parliamentary authority or any written rule, and a Point of Order citing the conflict

14 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

The tenth edition of RONR, has a similarly worded paragraph, but it is placed within the heading of Rules of Order (RONR, 10th ed., p. 17, ll. 4-18), rather than having a separate heading of its own as in the eleventh edition.

The ninth edition does not contain a corresponding paragraph and thus did not specifically give weight to established custom, except when an un-adopted parliamentary authority was being followed by established custom (RONR, 9th ed., p. 16).

Many of the bad habits that creep into an organization’s procedure can evolve into this category of established custom. While not necessarily against the written rules, they can become time-wasters and impart a bad reputation on parliamentary procedure in general. An oftenobserved example would be the chair asking for a motion to adjourn when there was no response to the last call for new business, the closing announcements have been made, the meeting is clearly over, and the members are packing up their things. The vote is taken as half the members are out the door. Another unnecessary procedure would be asking the secretary to report on the presence of a quorum.

How do you get rid of those bad habits that have become established custom?

As stated in the above-cited provision of the current edition of RONR (p. 19), if the practice violates a written rule, the established custom falls to the ground when a point of order is raised citing the written rule. If the established custom does not violate a rule but is just a bad habit or time-waster, there are still other ways.

As noted, an established custom can be changed for a particular instance by a majority vote (RONR, p. 19, ll. 6-9).

Some organizations are very resistant to change.

(These can often be recognized when all past presidents are kept on the board for life.) In one such organization, www.parliamentarians.org

15

the motion “to dispense with reading the motion cards” was made at the end of every board meeting. This organization had an old practice of reading the motion cards for all motions adopted at the meeting. This custom was then followed by years of moving to dispense with reading the motion cards. There was nothing in the bylaws or special rules of order about reading motion cards. The practice was finally ended by amending the special rules of order to state, “Motion cards need not be read at the end of the meeting unless ordered by the board.”

Deviating from established custom by majority vote can be accomplished by the use of unanimous consent (RONR, pp. 54-56). The chair can simply announce the change in procedure and ask if there is any objection.

If there is an objection (probably from one of those previously mentioned past presidents), there would be a vote on the matter. Confidence is required to take this action, because the chair is actually violating RONR by not following the established custom and proposing that it be violated.

Another similar way to deviate from established custom is through a point of order and appeal. Someone would raise a point of order that the established custom was not being followed, the chair would rule, there would be an appeal, and a majority vote would resolve the matter.

The ruling of the chair and appeal could be omitted by the chair referring the point of order directly to body for debate and vote (RONR, p. 254, ll. 8-10).

Because RONR states that this majority vote applies “in a particular instance” (p. 19, l. 10), the change does not technically set a precedent that actually abolishes or amends the established custom. The deviation process may need to be repeated or a written rule adopted that abolishes or amends the established custom, as was done with reading the motion cards.

John R. Berg, PRP, is currently President of the Washington State Association of Parliamentarians, and has served as parliamentarian for a number of national organizations.

He resides near Port Orchard, Washington.

16 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

RONR and Church Meetings

by Rochester Baker, PRP

“. . . the question of order is usually raised by the chairman’s calling the speaker to order. How this should be done must be left to the judgment of the chair. A nervous, excitable presiding officer is unfit to preside over a turbulent assembly.

A presiding officer who is calm, cool, and courteous while every one else is excited, and who is familiar with the duties of the chair and is impartial, can nearly always keep the assembly under control. The moment a speaker attacks the motives of another member, or refers to his opponent by name, or uses an offensive epithet, the chair should rap with the gavel . . . and then proceed according to the circumstances of the case.”

Henry M. Robert, Parliamentary Law, 1923 (New York, Irvington, 2001), p. 149

I attended my first church meeting when I retired from the military in 2002 and was in awe at the chaos and lack of decorum in the proceedings. I think it may have been the minister’s first meeting. Members were talking

to each other; someone was yelling, “Point of order”; more than one person was trying to present a motion; someone called for the “question”; and there was a senior deacon wanting to “raise a question of privilege.” www.parliamentarians.org

17

Many members were uncertain as to what they were voting on and about a plethora of other items. The pastor was perplexed.

This piqued my interest and started my journey into the study of parliamentary procedure. Is this how church meetings are conducted? The National Association of Parliamentarians helped me find a local group that could assist me in learning more about parliamentary procedure.

I gathered more information during my 15 years as a parliamentarian and in my interactions with ministers, some with up to 30 years of involvement with churches. There were no surveys, polls, questionnaires, or statistics – just information obtained through observation and discussions with others about church meetings. In addition, I was enlightened about church meetings through NAP events and training as a parliamentarian, and from information obtained from other parliamentarians.

Why do churches need parliamentary procedures to conduct their meetings? They need it because they are deliberative assemblies. Churches have split/divided because of disagreements that occurred in church meetings. So, how can churches have effective and efficient meetings?

Henry M. Robert states that, if there is disorder in the assembly, in nine cases out of 10 it is the fault of the presiding officer. (Parliamentary Law, p. 302) If possible, the presiding officer should be chosen because of parliamentary skills, not as a desire 18 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

to honor him or her. The presiding officer should have the ability to command others. (Parliamentary Law, p. 302). We know this does not always happen, but individuals can learn to preside. The presiding officer should be able to maintain order, provide strong leadership, remain impartial, be tactful and fair, and exercise good judgement. The presiding officer should never get excited, never be unjust (even to the most troublesome member), never take advantage of a member’s lack of knowledge, and never be more technical than necessary (Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised, 11th ed., p. 456). The presiding officer should be familiar with the duties of the chair (RONR, p. 449) and be equipped with a gavel, agenda, script, bylaws, parliamentary authority, correspondence, and a list of the members of all standing and special committees. (Presidentially Speaking: A Guide to Presiding, (Independence, MO: National Association of Parliamentarians, 2013)) My personal observations about churches indicate that: people normally attend church for comfort, not for disharmony; they are used to listening and not speaking; they are not accustomed to participation in church meetings; many do not know parliamentary procedure; some may have strong personal convictions; and, church members often are not aware of fundamental principles of parliamentary law or meeting rules.

In summary, the presiding officer is like a commanding officer.

An effective presiding officer is key to a successful meeting and can eliminate a large amount of disorder and disciplinary problems. The church meeting can be most effective and efficient if the chair has a good

knowledge of parliamentary procedures; follows the fundamental principles of parliamentary law, rules, and bylaws; and ensures that members are informed of the motion and the result.

H elpf u l Tip s The following tips are helpful for any meeting, just not church meetings: The meeting should start on time; The presiding officer should know parliamentary procedure; The presiding officer should have a script; A brief overview of parliamentary procedure including the basic rules, principles, and fundamentals of parliamentary law should be provided; (Pointers on Parliamentary Procedure (Independence, MO: National Association of Parliamentarians, 2012), pp 2-3) A copy of meeting rules should be provided, including the rules that members must be recognized by the chair before speaking; all debate must be directed to or through the chair; members may not speak a second time unless all others who wish to speak have spoken at least once; and discussion of personalities will not be tolerated; The presiding officer should not allow anyone to speak until the motion is seconded (where required) and the question has been stated; The chair should ensure that the members know the exact question to be voted on, even if it must be repeated several times. This avoids confusion; The presiding officer should not participate in debate unless he or she vacates the chair; The presiding officer should remain neutral; and The presiding officer should know the duties of the chair.

Rochester Baker, Sr., PRP, is past president of the South Carolina Association of Parliamentarians, and is current president of the Columbia Capital Unit of Parliamentarians, and vice president of the South Carolina Association of Parliamentarians. In 2011, his article “Completing the Professional Qualifying Course

by Running Like the Buffalo” was published in the National Parliamentarian. RONR and Church Meetings was a presentation at the 41st Biennial Convention in 2017. www.parliamentarians.org

19

The 10 Best Time Savers in RONR (Part 1)

by Michael Peck, PRP

This article is the result of many years of parliamentary presentations, and observations about misused motions. “The Ten Best” are not in any order of the time they can save.

Implementation of the techniques and the time allotted can vary greatly with the presider and the participants.

Agendas Preparation of an agenda is credited with being a top-level time saver.

It organizes the presenter and the participants. Each item can be assigned to a time, or the overall agenda can be assigned a time length. This sets up a time-sensitivity to accomplish the items on the agenda. Simply establishing an order for the meeting’s business can be a time-saver. Assigning a time-value to each business item can also help move business along.

There are two schools of thought about agendas. One is to adopt the agenda with a formal motion and vote.

In the author’s opinion this is old school and allows the leaders to control what comes up at the meeting and in what order. Under this method, to add or change something on the agenda takes a two-thirds vote to suspend the rules.

The second school of thought is to follow an agenda but not formally adopt it. The agenda can be used as a guide to accomplish business, but also allows flexibility to add additional items as they arise at the meeting. Our current society is moving so fast that it may be too late to assist or react if something must wait until the next meeting to be discussed.

Within the agenda itself there is the opportunity to speed up the meeting.

20 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

Roberts’ Rules of Order, Newly Revised, 11th ed. refers to it as a consent calendar, or consent agenda. A consent calendar consists of uncontroversial business items, and multiple items of business can be dispensed with a single vote.

One last time saver under the agenda is to have a strategic issue assigned to every meeting. How often do organizations develop a strategic plan for three years and then put the plan on the shelf until the next three-year period? The author developed something that worked very well: The “strategic issue.” Every agenda developed by the author had a strategic issue as the first item of business.

Typically, this agenda item was straight from the strategic plan, and provided an opportunity to address emergency or critical issues. With a typical agenda, the most important items of business are put at the end of the agenda under new business, after discussion of all the officer and committee reports. Members are exhausted prior to getting to the most important items on the agenda.

As an example: What do associations do when they need to have the members attend? They feed them. Hundreds, if not thousands of dollars, are spent to entice members to attend. Then, the most important item of business on the agenda is where? You guessed it, under New Business. So, we feed them, and we deal with all the mundane issues that are of little interest to the members.

We finally get to new business and the members are ready to vote right? What do you think happens by the time they spend an hour discussing things of little interest to the vast number of members who attend to have lunch? You guessed

it! Someone raises a point of order regarding the presence of a quorum.

It appears that many members have left.

With a strategically-oriented agenda, the critical issues would have been discussed and voted on first, while a quorum was still present. This is obviously not only a time saver, but it also saves hundreds of dollars of member funds.

Voting and methods of voting Effective use of different methods of voting can be great time savers.

Have you ever attended a meeting where the first item of business was a roll call? The author was in a meeting once where it took 15 minutes to call the roll of 300 directors. This is a waste of time and financial resources of those attending the meeting.

RONR (pp. 54-56) speaks of general, or unanimous, consent. This is a way to substantially speed up the voting process.

The first item of business at most meeting is the approval of the minutes.

Have you ever heard a chair ask for a motion to approve the minutes? “OK Joe, it is your turn to make the motion to approve the minutes this month. Suzie, it is your turn to second the motion to approve the minutes.” All this is unnecessary with just a little parliamentary training. Instead, the chair can ask if there are any corrections to the minutes.

After all, are not all additions or deletions corrections? The chair then states, “There being no corrections to the minutes, the minutes stand approved” – or “approved as mailed,” “approved as published,” or “approved as distributed.”

The author was hired by an organization that had three active lawsuits involving the officers and the organization. The courts had ordered that 39 bylaws amendments be drafted by an attorney for the organization. Do you know how many hours of parliamentary law or procedures are required for an attorney to graduate from law school?

None. Anyway, the author was hired as a professional presiding officer (PPO) to conduct the meeting. Six hours later all the amendments were adopted.

Nineteen were adopted by unanimous consent. Is “unanimous” greater than two-thirds? How many hours would we have been discussing bylaws amendments if we had voted by ballot or by standing count on every amendment? We started at 6 p.m. and adjourned at midnight. The three attorneys involved in the lawsuits came up to shake the author’s hand and unanimously stated that if they had not witnessed the process they would not have believed it possible. When the members find out you have no vested interest in the outcome, they participate in the process. With RONR the job gets done.

Additional time-saving ideas will be presented in the next edition of the National Parliamentarian.

Michael Peck, PRP, has been a speaker and consultant for Parliamentary training and seminars for over 40 years. He has been a presenter at multiple National Association of Parliamentarians (NAP) District 8 and NAP Conventions. He has been a member of AIP since 1975, and a continuous member of NAP since 1978, receiving his PRP in 1991. He loves teaching and training Parliamentary procedure at the unit level, the state level and the National level as well as in his communities. He is a past state president of Arizona and has been an officer in three different states. He is a multi-term past president of the Alpha unit in Arizona. He also has belonged to units in Michigan and Nevada. He has served as a Parliamentarian and/or as a Professional Presiding officer for many local, state and National organizations including most recently the Republican Party in Arizona and Oklahoma in 2016. He specializes in parliamentary consulting and training for HOA’s and church organizations. www.parliamentarians.org

21

Test Yourself

Test Yourself

PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE

The Decimal System

Vocabulary Builder

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Based on each factoid from Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised, 11th ed., (RONR) place in the blank the correct numeral that satisfies the statement.

The numbers zero through ten are each used once and only once to answer the challenges. _____ The number of basic classes or classifications of motions. _____ The maximum number of minutes a member may speak, having obtained

the floor while a debatable motion is immediately pending.

Use the underlined letters and the definition to complete the word, and then write the answer in the blank provided.

EXAMPLE: men

A motion used to change the wording of another motion.

amend ____________________

1. lin

The official decision of the presiding officer.

____________________

2. oll call vote

To place into record how ____________________ members voted by calling out the name of each member and asking how each one voted.

3. and at ease

Declaration of the chair for a brief meeting pause.

Members stay in their places and may talk quietly.

4. sio

A meeting or series of ____________________ meetings (as a convention) with a single order of business, agenda, or program.

5. rum

The minimum number of members who must be present at a meeting to transact business legally.

6. den

The rules of rank or priority ____________________ which govern the proposing, consideration and disposal of motions.

7. man

Closely or significantly related ____________________ to the immediately pending question.

_____ The number of standard descriptive characteristics for all motions. _____ In a meeting of 18 members, the minimum number of members who

may demand a separate vote on each section of a resolution which has

a series of independent subjects. _____ Although an organization’s bylaws may contain more, the recommended

number of articles that should be in a set of bylaws. _____ The number of different types of main motions. _____ The number of different types of business meetings as described in RONR. _____ The number of different methods of conducting the deliberative

process in writing (rather than aurally) that RONR allows within

deliberative assemblies. _____ The number of different punishments that a society could impose. _____ The number of steps required to fully process a motion through to

its passage. _____ The number of different types of secondary motions.

Answers on page 28 Vivian Vincent, PRP, is District 8 Director and the 2017-2019 District Director. She is owner of AZ (Arizona) Parliamentary Consulting; past president of the Arizona State Association of Parliamentarians; member and past president of the Arizona Alpha Unit; and, former member of the Arizona Professional Unit. She serves as parliamentarian for local, state, national and international organizations, businesses, and individuals.

She is a meeting parliamentarian, bylaw consultant, professional presiding officer, and formal opinion writer. She enjoys presenting parliamentary training workshops, speaking to groups about parliamentary procedure, and creating unique and challenging workshops for parliamentarians.

David Mezzera, PRP, is a past president of the California State Association of Parliamentarians, past District VIII Director and currently chairs NAP’s Micro Certificate Project Subcommittee.

____________________

____________________

Continued on page 24 22 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

www.parliamentarians.org

23

Test Yourself

&

PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE

Questions Answers

Vocabulary Builder

continued

8. ati

To choose a person as a candidate to fill an office or other elected position.

____________________

9. ull and oid

Not having a specific legal force or effect (Two words)

____________________ ____________________

10. ice

An official announcement ____________________ informing the members of an item of business that will be introduced at the meeting.

11. tio

A proposal at a meeting that ____________________ certain action be taken or certain views about a subject be expressed by the assembly.

12. ting

A single gathering of persons ____________________ or members of an organization, usually to transact business.

13. revi notice

Notice of a proposed action ____________________ made either as an announcement or in writing, a specified time in advance of the meeting at which it is to be considered.

14. cut session

A meeting at which the proceedings are secret.

15. ion of the assembly An incidental motion that

demands a rising vote.

____________________ ____________________ Answers on page 28

Shane D. Dunbar, MEd, PRP, PAP, has conducted over 540 parliamentary procedure workshops nationwide.

He has over 16 copyrights dealing with parliamentary procedure instructional materials (including 15 vocabulary builder worksheets) that can be reviewed on www.northwest.net/parli-pro.

24 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

Test Yourself

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 Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised, 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 NP Q&A Editor, 213 South Main Street, Independence, MO 64060, or emailed to npeditor@nap2.org.

Q

Question 55: Our organization’s president “A,” who was elected to his office by the general membership, tendered his written resignation in anger to the board. The board, which is empowered to do so, accepted his resignation. Our vice president, “B,” succeeded to the office of president and our board filled the vacancy in the office of vice president with “C” in accordance with the bylaws. The parliamentary authority is RONR (11th ed.). The former president, “A,” is now the immediate past president, who has certain rights under our bylaws.

He insists on attending board meetings and participating fully in place of the prior immediate past president, “D,” who served a full term commendably and contributed significantly to the board before “A” resigned as president. “A,” on the other hand, is disruptive and verbally abusive on board-meeting conference calls. His behavior has caused the new president to adjourn board meetings early. What can we do about this? Does “A” get to sit on the board as immediate past president even though he resigned? If so, how do we get rid of him?

Answer: In part, the reason for your dilemma is that the bylaws do not define “immediate past president,” but nevertheless provide a role for such an officer. Although the wisdom and experience of an immediate past president can be helpful in many cases, in others, as you have found out, it can be disruptive.

Unless otherwise defined, “immediate past president” means precisely that – the most recent past president. In your case, disruptive and volatile member “A” is the immediate past president because he is the past president who most recently served as president. See George Demeter, Demeter’s Manual of Parliamentary Law & Procedure (Blue Book ed., 1969), p. 258; NAP Questions & Answers III (1997), p. 130, q. 472.

Continued on page 26 www.parliamentarians.org

25

Test Yourself

&

Questions Answers continued

To avoid that situation, many organizations define “immediate past president” in their bylaws as “the past president (a) who was (i) elected or (ii) appointed to fill a vacancy of greater than one half of a presidential term, (b) who served to the end of his or her term, and (c) who served most recently as president.” If your organization had adopted that definition in its bylaws, “D” would remain as the immediate past president.

Under your bylaws, the immediate past president “A” has the right to participate fully in board meetings. Your options for holding him accountable for disorderly conduct in a meeting are limited.

The immediate past president could be subject to discipline, up to and including removal from the office of immediate past president. For the disciplinary process, refer to RONR, Chapter 20. Removal of the immediate past president from office would create an unfillable vacancy in the position of immediate past president (Demeter, p. 258). In this organization, which simply assigns the immediate past president a board position, that is not a significant issue. In organizations that assign the immediate past president significant duties, such as chairing important committees, it is wise to have bylaws provisions addressing how those committees will be chaired in case of the resignation, removal, or death of the immediate past president.

In the alternative to discipline, you could also remove “A” from the position by changing who is the immediate past president. That means another presidential resignation. Depending on your bylaws, it might work like this: The current (new) president, “B,” resigns his office and becomes immediate past president. This removes the troublemaking past president “A” from the board, makes the new president “B” the immediate past president, and elevates the current (newly appointed to fill the vacancy) vice president “C” to the office of president. Of course, that may cause some awkwardness in future election cycles, particularly if the organization has term limits.

Another alternative is to amend the bylaws to get rid of the legislated board seat for an immediate past president, or to add a definition for immediate past president like the recommendation above. In that case, however, it is important to check applicable state law. Many state corporate statutes prohibit the shortening of a board member’s term through a bylaw amendment.

26 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

&

Test Yourself

Questions Answers

Q

continued

Question 56: I am the secretary of an organization with RONR as its parliamentary authority. At our July meeting, a motion was made to approve a consultant agreement. During the subsequent discussion, questions were raised for which no answers were available. Although no vote was taken, all board members expressed their desire to “table” the matter until the next regular meeting in August, at which time the superintendent could provide answers to the questions. They then moved on to the next agenda item. How do I handle this?

Answer: For your minutes, simply state what happened. “Mr. Smith’s motion to approve the agreement to retain Mr. Jones as a consultant was postponed to the August regular meeting.” Then place the item in unfinished business and general orders on the August meeting agenda.

A brief analysis of “what was done” will inform most minutes. Your board, for all intents and purposes, disposed of the main motion by unanimously consenting to the suggestion to “table” it with the understanding that it would be taken up at the August meeting. In this case, the term “table” – because it referred to a specific meeting at which the motion would come up again for consideration – was clearly intended as a motion to “postpone.” This confusion between the motions to postpone and to lay on the table is common.

Demeter (p. 100) states: “[W]hen the proposal is made [to table to the next meeting] it should be treated not as the motion to lay on the table (which has top rank among subsidiary motions and is undebatable), but to postpone (which has fourth rank among the subsidiary motions and is debatable).”

Although subsidiary motions are not typically tracked in minutes, the disposition of motions is recorded (RONR, p. 469); when a subsidiary motion (such as refer, postpone, or lay on the table) that temporarily disposes of a motion is adopted, the minutes entry recording disposition of the main motion will reflect that the subsidiary motion was adopted. Matters that are postponed should then be included as general orders in the agenda for the next regular meeting (RONR, pp. 186, 371).

To avoid confusion at future meetings, it would be appropriate to suggest to the chair that proper terminology be used for postponement, that subsidiary motions be made formally (even when it is expected that the disposition will be by unanimous consent), and that unanimous consent be processed by asking if there is objection and then declaring the subsidiary motion adopted (RONR, pp. 54–55). Relying on common assumptions in the parliamentary context can result in misunderstanding.

Continued on page 28

www.parliamentarians.org

27

Test Yourself

&

NAP Connections

Questions Answers continued

Congratulations on being concerned about the minutes. Your situation provides a good example of how to prepare minute entries using proper technical terms even when the members do not.

The delivery of quality diverse educational and learning experiences is pivotal to NAP’s official strategy of bringing parliamentary education to the world.

Questions & Answers Research Team

Michael Malamut, PRP

C. Alan Jennings, James H. Stewart, PRP PRP Advisor: John Stackpole, RP

Helen McFadden, PRP

Answer Key Decimal System from page 22 (with page references from RONR 11th Edition):

5. Main, Subsidiary, Privileged, Incidental, and Bring Back. (p. 59) 10. minutes. (p. 387) 8. Precedence over, Applicable to, Interrupt, Second, Debatable, Amendable, Vote Required, Reconsider. (pp. 79-80) 1. Just as with a division of the assembly, this action may be demanded by a single member. (p. 110) 9. N-O-M-O-M-E-C-P-A (p. 13) 2. Original and incidental. (p. 100) 7. Regular, special, adjourned, annual, executive session, public session, electronic (pp. 89-97) 0. Postal mail, chat rooms, email and fax do not constitute deliberative assemblies according to RONR. (p. 98) 4. Censure, fine, suspension, expulsion. (p. 643) 6. Motion is made, seconded, stated by the chair, debated, voted on, and the result of the vote is announced. (pp. 32, 42) 3. Subsidiary, Privileged, and Incidental. (p. 58) 28 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

New Educational Opportunities Coming in

Vocabulary Builder from page 23-24

1. Ruling 2. Roll 3. Stand 4. Session 5. Quorum 6. Precedence 7. Germane 8. Nomination 9. Null, void 10. Notice 11. Motion 12. Meeting 13. Previous 14. Executive 15. Division

The success of these efforts depends heavily on the ability of multiple NAP committees and specialty teams to integrate their distinct contributions into a comprehensive educational approach that equitably addresses the distinct needs of regular members, practicing parliamentarians, international affiliates and the public. The current education plan creates a clear framework through which these entities can develop, maintain and enhance their parliamentary, governance and leadership skills with an uncompromising commitment to excellence. The plan provides a robust foundation on which to launch a newly invigorated learning program within NAP, built on the strong foundation already in place.

This plan will align all NAP education with the NAP Body of Knowledge (BOK).

The Education Resources Committee, Professional Development Committee, and several specialty teams are designing all in-person training and online educational products to deepen the learner’s knowledge in key areas of parliamentary and leadership learning. The 2018 National Training Conference, 2019 Biennial Convention, the online Knowledge Center and the Learning Library will all be based on specific domains (member, leader, consultant) within the BOK to provide learners a consistent educational experience. Additionally, the Youth Committees will be developing learning opportunities targeted toward youth, competitive parliamentary teams and coaches.

Over the next few months, the Education Cluster will recruit and train instructors, introduce a new STAR certificate program for non-credentialed members and the public, roll out a subscription program of basic to intermediate courses for use by units and members at large, and create advanced learning opportunities for practicing parliamentarians. We encourage you to check the NAP website often over the next few months to get more information on these exciting programs. Your feedback is welcome as you try these courses. www.parliamentarians.org

29

NAP Connections

NAP Connections

NAP Committee Updates The Board of Directors of the National Association of Parliamentarians met on November 14 and December 19. Here is a summary of committee goals and accomplishments as reported to the board: 2018 National Training Conference

has developed plans for an exciting conference including special sessions for practicing parliamentarians, interactive Leadership Conference, and a Canadian wine-tasting excursion. Registration is in progress.

BOK course is selecting and testing

software for use with their new courses, which will be aligned with the NAP Body of Knowledge.

Bylaws Committee is reviewing

and updating sample bylaws and checklists for new units, associations, and youth groups. They have also reviewed and approved bylaws for several new units that have been formed this biennium.

Education Resources has developed

six new on-demand presentations to be rolled out in 2018, along with mini courses and full webinars. Members will be receiving information on NAP’s new Knowledge Center.

International Service Committee is

working to create opportunities for international members to participate in workshops through live-streaming, and to provide NAP materials translated in a variety of languages in order to reach a broader audience.

Membership Extension and

Retention is working on a new member packet to be completed early 30 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

in 2018. It is designed to increase the effectiveness of the experience for all potential members.

Membership Cluster made a

high-level presentation to the board of directors on NAP’s current membership composition. See the charts on page 31 for more membership information.

Membership and Registration

Examiners Committee is continuing its work of grading new member and registered membership exams.

It also is reviewing and updating all study materials to ensure that these materials adequately assist applicants in preparing to pass their exams.

Professional Development

Committee is aiding eligible RP and PRP members to renew their credentials. It is also updating the current Professional Qualifying Course modules, and accepting applications for the April instructors course. This will be the first Instructors Course aligned with the Body of Knowledge.

Social Media

Committee has ongoing responsibilities for the creation of social media postings.

Their major upcoming focus is on a social media blitz promoting parliamentary procedure and governance during the April observance of Parliamentary Law Month.

Technology Cluster

is working on a major revamp of the NAP website designed to allow easier access for members and the public. A new mobile application will be rolled out for use in 2018. This app will be continuously updated to add new capabilities.

Resource Development is

developing sponsorship letters for NAP business partners to inform them of sponsorship and advertising opportunities. These efforts will increase the level of non-dues revenue available to support NAP’s educational activities. www.parliamentarians.org

31

NAP Connections

NAP Connections

Call for Nominations for NAP Educational Foundation Trustee This is a call for nominations for the four NAP Educational Foundation trustee positions that will be open in September 2018. Nominations must be made by annual and life contributors to the NAP Educational Foundation.

The NAP Educational Foundation makes available many opportunities in youth leadership and education. It also has assisted in bringing representatives from the youth partnerships to the biennial convention by assisting with the costs associated with their attendance.

Trustees have also planned, implemented, and completed successful fundraisers, including a basket auction and a live auction in Chicago.

The Foundation has sponsored the purchase of software for web meetings and web education.

It has provided grants for a consultant, evaluation software for the Credentialing Commission, association presiding workshop, youth organization interns, young professional social workshop, and for the 2017 Youth Day in Chicago. The trustees meet by teleconference bi-monthly in consultation and in planning future activities. This very busy group of leaders is dedicated to gaining funds for additional improvements in youth leadership and professional education advancement.

If you know of individuals who are willing to dedicate time, money, and energy toward completing the various projects of the Foundation, please send their names and brief bios to Sandy Olson, PRP, NAP Educational Foundation president.

For a description of the process, please see the news page of the Foundation’s website, www.napef.org 32 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

District One Update

by Rosemary Seghatoleslami, PRP, District One Director

Responsibilities of trustees include, but are not limited to: • Attendance at all trustee meetings, which are held electronically on at least a bi-monthly basis and occasionally in person; • Working in preparation for and at each NAPEF event;

Members of District One at the 2017 NAP Biennial Convention in Lombard, IL

• Soliciting donations for the annual NAPEF auction;

District One has had a very good start to the new biennium with a net gain in membership

• Serving as a committee chairman and supporting the other committees; • Actively promoting the NAPEF among NAP members; and • Making an annual financial contribution to NAPEF

Nominations should be sent to solson15@msn.com

by April 1, 2018

Three of the Associations in the District – New England, New Jersey and New York – have elected new officers. But the most exciting thing that is happening in District One is that we have been chosen as the location for the 2018 National Association of Parliamentarian’s National Training Conference. The Conference will be held on September 7–9, 2018, at the Buffalo Hyatt Regency Hotel in downtown Buffalo, NY. This is the first time in many years that an NAP national event has been held in District One. Besides the wonderful workshops that are planned, other activities include a Professional Qualifying Course, a Professional Renewal Course, the always popular Leadership Conference, and a trip to Niagara Falls sponsored by the NAP Educational Foundation. Plans are also underway to charter a new unit in the Buffalo area, one of the first in western New York. Please take advantage of the early bird registration rate and join us in Buffalo in 2018. www.parliamentarians.org

33

NAP Connections

NAP Connections

NYAP: Looking Back with Pride – Looking Ahead with Excitement

by President Beverly S. Tatham, PRP, and Secretary Joan H. Corbisiero, PRP

The New York Association of Parliamentarians (NYAP) has a membership of approximately 60 percent members-at-large of the National Association of Parliamentarians and 40 percent primary members of its three NAP Units – Parliamentarians of Greater New York (Long Island), Parliamentarians of Metro New York (Manhattan), and Lee Demeter Registered Parliamentarians (which meets via teleconference and includes members who belong to associations other than NYAP).

NYAP meets biennially in odd-numbered years to elect its officers and hold an educational conference.

The public, as well as NAP members, are invited. A cram course for taking the NAP membership exam is offered and the membership exam is administered.

Reaching NYAP members who are not unit members is greatly facilitated by the membership lists with email addresses 34 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

available from Headquarters; reaching the public is the problem, especially in upstate and western NY areas which are not served by NAP units.

NYAP usually offers its members two free webinars annually – one in November before the holiday season begins and another in late winter/early spring while snow is still on the ground.

It also maintains a website for itself and the local units to promote activities and events. (www.nyparliamentarians.info) The Parliamentarians of Greater New York (PGNY) meets on a designated Monday evening during the months of October, December, February and April at Hofstra University in Hempstead, NY. An educational program is presented at each of these meetings. PGNY holds its annual dinner meeting in May and sponsors an annual educational conference. The annual education conference will held be at Syosset High

School, Long Island, on April 21, 2018.

This conference will be co-sponsored by a local PTA region, and public attendance is solicited from organizations with which the unit members are affiliated.

The Parliamentarians of Metro New York (PMNY) meets on the second Monday of odd-numbered months throughout the year. The unit utilizes social media and word of mouth to invite potential members and interested guests to the meetings. In September 2017, PMNY amended its bylaws to allow for electronic meetings/voting.

In addition, the membership committee developed a visitor’s orientation protocol which includes distribution of a welcome packet to guests attending each meeting.

The welcome packet includes a visitor’s questionnaire, PMNY Unit evaluation sheet, NAP membership application, PMNY press release & FAQ Sheet.

The executive board met twice to discuss and review opportunities for growth and development of the unit and its membership and to review our successes and challenges during the biennium.

The unit held its inaugural annual public workshop on Saturday August 5, 2017, in Brooklyn, NY. This one-day workshop focused on the fundamental building blocks of parliamentary procedure and provided attendees with an opportunity to sit for the NAP membership and registered parliamentarian exams. Our facilitators for the day included Darlene T. Allen, PRP, NAP Director at Large, and Shannon Sun, PRP, CPP. Lee Demeter Registered Parliamentarians (LDRP) meets by telephone conference on a Monday

evening during the months of September, November, January, March, and May. This is a unit of both active and retired RPs and PRPs. An educational program is provided at each meeting and many outstanding NAP presenters have been very generous with their parliamentary presentations to the group.

The Future of NYAP. These are exciting times for the NYAP. The association will host the upcoming 2018 National Training Conference (NTC) in Buffalo, New York on September 7-9, 2018. The Association looks forward to welcoming fellow parliamentarians and others to the City of Lights in the Empire State of New York.

In addition, the NYAP president is leading the charge from NAP President Jim Jones to charter a unit in Buffalo prior to the upcoming training conference. On November 11, 2017, an open house informational meeting was held in Buffalo. The event was well received and several of the attendees are currently preparing to take the membership exam and then charter a new unit in Buffalo by March 2018.

In addition, numerous requests were received to explore chartering NAP units in the Albany, Syracuse and Rochester areas.

NYAP recognizes that membership engagement is vital to our growth and future as an outstanding association. It is the members who provide educational programs and parliamentary support for organizations in the State, and the association is committed to providing quality learning opportunities and support for all members. www.parliamentarians.org

35

NAP Connections

NAP Connections

The Rising STAR Project (Skills, Talents, Awards and Recognition)

by David Mezzera, PRP, and Ramona Marsalis-Hill, PRP

Are you a STAR? Are you serving as a presiding officer, secretary, treasurer, appointed parliamentarian, committee member? If you have served, are serving, will serve let us recognize your work and accomplishments.

NAP’s new leadership development certificate programs focus on organizational leadership, basic parliamentary skills, and the crucial abilities necessary for successful execution as an organizational officer.

These five programs focusing on pragmatic leadership skills provide practical, intermediate level content developed by the National Association of Parliamentarians, the world’s leading authority in parliamentary procedure and meeting management.

These programs will teach members new to leadership roles within their organization how to elevate into effective leaders by performing hands-on real-world assignments while being coached by some of the premier parliamentary experts in the country.

Today’s organizational leaders need a multitude of knowledge, skills and abilities to successfully serve their organizations. These five online certificate courses developed by the top thought leaders in the parliamentary process and 36 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

organizational development fields will equip participants to manage the responsibilities of their roles, develop interpersonal skills, and learn best practices for the betterment of their organization.

The certificate courses available as part of the Rising STAR Project are: Becoming a Powerful Presider Effective Elected Officers – Secretary Effective Elected Officers – Treasurer Becoming Part of a High Performing Team (committee work) The Competent Parliamentarian (for member-parliamentarians) Participants who successfully complete all the courses within the program will receive an Organizational Leadership Certificate. Learners will also receive individual proficiency certificates in each subject area as they complete each eight-week course within the program. These courses have been approved by the Professional Development Committee for continuing education credit.

In Memoriam

NP commemorates the following members who have passed from our midst; may they rest in peace: Viola Adams (MI) Karla Fuller (TX) Leonard Glaeser (MN) Bobbie Healy (WA) James Key (SC) Lawrence Marcott (WY) Martha Thomson (CA) Edward Weber, PRP-R (IN) Ada Williams, PRP-R (TX)

New Registered Parliamentarians

NP congratulates the following individuals for attaining the status of Registered Parliamentarian: Eva Mae Board (IN) Sadie Boles (IL) Joy Daley (NY) Mark Ebert (AZ) Edward Frazier (IN) Margaret-Ann Howie (MD) Sally LaMacchia (CA) Carl Nohr (AB) Bill Shelton (MD) Maria Trujillo-Tough (CA) Deborah Watkins (TX)

New Professional Registered Parliamentarians

NP congratulates the following individuals for attaining the status of Professional Registered Parliamentarian: Christopher James Cavin (OK) Greg Filbeck (PA) Lucy Hamilton Johnson (MN) Debra Henry (VA) Roxanne Hubbard (MO) Atul Kapur (ON) Mark Moriarty (FL) Carol Roberson (MO) Linda Sehrt (MO) Gary Storm (MO) Marsha Thornton (TX) Steven Walls (DC) Rita Womack (MO)

www.parliamentarians.org

37

NAP Connections

NAP Connections

National Association of Parliamentarians New Members

NP welcomes the following individuals as new members.

Names in italic are the new member’s instructor.

Roy Achong (OK) Melodie Aduja (HI) William J. Puette, PRP Idris Anaisah (HI) William J. Puette, PRP Janice Baker (NM) Kevin Baker (TX) Cindy Hinckley Earle Banks (GA) Maurice Henderson, PRP Robert Barksdale (HI) William J. Puette, PRP Shawnte Boteilho (HI) William J. Puette, PRP Charles Bowles (TX) Cindy Hinckley Erma Boyd-Dorsey (FL) Theresa Braswell (NC) Melodie Brooks (CO) Afra Brown (DC) Wanda Sims, PRP Diana Brown-Brumfield (OH) Patricia Koch, PRP Jamie Butler (TX) Deborah Lynn Arrington, PRP Rhonda Cameron (ELEC) Robin Campbell (MD) Kay Crews Francisco Campos Jr. (FL) Josefina Chavira (TX) David Schulze Tak-Sang Cheng (HI) William J. Puette, PRP Karen Clymer (OK) Jackson Coley (HI) William J. Puette, PRP 38 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

Monice Crawford (KS) Raven Deerwater (CA) Kay Crews, PRP Madeline DiAngelo (ID) Kevin Connelly, PRP Herman Dorsey (FL) Maurice Henderson, PRP Georgia Edwards (TX) Scott Ellis (AB) Patrick Knoll, PRP Ozella Foster-Robinson (MO) Maurice Henderson, PRP Elizabeth Franklin (TX) Vincent Gambino (PA) Komal Gill (WA) Kevin R. Connelly, PRP Katryna Gonzalez (CA) Maxwell Graber (WA) Kevin R. Connelly, PRP Robert Grandon (VA) Jennifer Grundler (VA) Tamara Haines (VA) Martha Rollins, PRP Juanita Hall(DC) Wanda Sims, PRP Laura Harps (OH) Patricia Koch, PRP Clarence Harris (OH) Robert L. Rosell, PRP J. Ray Harwood (AZ) Portia Hicks (CO) Christina Hodgson (AB) Patrick Knoll, PRP Chris Howe (TX) Ronna Jackson (MI)

Rosemarie Jackson (DC) Wanda Sims, PRP Husayn Jamal (QC) Kaala Jay (HI) William J. Puette, PRP Traci Jones (DC) Wanda Sims, PRP Paula Jones (TX) Arlene-Anela Kekoolani (HI) William J. Puette, PRP Dakota King(AZ) Joseph Kostecki II (NJ) Tio Lathen (HI) William J. Puette, PRP Joy Lecuyer (NM) Reuben Lillie (IL) Keisha Major (DC) Wanda Sims, PRP Bobby McDowell (OH) Charles McGinnis III (OH) Aoife McManus (AB) Pat Knoll, PRP Charles Mencke (TX) Cindy Hinckley Charla Miller (TX) Cindy Hinckley Lyn Montgomery (TX) Cindy Hinckley Seamus Mulryan (PA) Kathryn Nutting (GA) Yvonne Oliver (OH) Patricia Koch, PRP Udaya Padakandla (TX) Cindy Hinckley Gary Rollins (MD) Maurice Henderson, PRP Arthur Sayre Jr. (TX) Richard Hayes, PRP

Alex Schreiner (AB) Patrick Knoll, PRP Hester Schwarzer (TX) John Scott Jr. (TX) Cindy Hinckley Melvin Sehrt (MO) Joy Freeland, PRP Sunny Smith (VA) Michael Wagner-Diggs, PRP Donalda Smith (TX) Reecia Stoglin (TX) Cindy Hinckley Sheila Tate (TX) James Jones, PRP Caroline Terry (GA) Maurice Henderson, PRP Bishal Thapa(ID) Weldon L. Merritt, PRP Angela Tucker (OH) Charles Veale (ON) Kay Crews, PRP Robert Wall (WI) Robin Walthour (MD) Frankie Washington (TX) Maurice Henderson, PRP Jason Waters (ID) Kevin Connelly, PRP Jeffrey Westman (AB) Pat Knoll, PRP R. Daniel White (TX) Lucy Hicks-Anderson, PRP Peter White (SD) Antwan Williams (VA) Martha Rollins Carol Williams (GA) Maurice Henderson, PRP Geraldine Wong (HI) William J. Puette, PRP www.parliamentarians.org

39

NAP Connections

NAP Connections

i n M emo r i a l

Lorraine Buckley NAP Past President, 1975-1977 Early in January we bid farewell to NAP’s 23rd president, Lorraine Buckley, who passed away at the age of 93.

Lorraine served as president from 1975-1977; her theme was “Reach for the Stars.” She joined the association in 1960 and became an RP in 1961.

Lorraine was very active at all levels of the association. She was associate editor of the National Parliamentarian for six years; authored many excellent articles for the magazine; and trained and mentored numerous young parliamentarians, convention parliamentarians, presiding officers, and teachers. She also served as president of the Missouri State Association of Parliamentarians and of the Missouri State Past Presidents’ and Registered Parliamentary Unit. She was the founding president of the Santa Fe Trail Unit and for many years was a member in the oldest parliamentary club in America, the Parliamentary Club of Kansas City.

Lorraine was also extremely active in her church and community. She served 11 years on the Independence School Board, including two terms as vice-president.

She also served many years as the executive director of the Women’s City Club in Kansas City.

In 1947, Lorraine married her high school sweetheart Tom Buckley. During their 57-year marriage, they raised eight children. Their family eventually grew to include 20 grandchildren and 15 great grandchildren.

Teresa Dean, a long-time NAP member and past president of the Missouri State Association, knew and worked with Lorraine for many years. “Having started my studies of Parliamentary Procedure in 1972, I found that Lorraine was not only a great teacher and friend but she had the ability to guide her students to where in RONR a student should look to find the answer to a question,” remembers Teresa.

NAP Past President Leonard Young observed: “Lorraine Buckley was a great lady. She was in the first unit I joined in NAP and encouraged me to go to my first national convention in 1983, then nominated me from the floor for NAP Secretary in 1989. She was a mentor and friend who believed in service and encouraging new leaders for the future.”

Lorraine will be long and fondly remembered.

40 National Parliamentarian • Winter 2018

Things to Do Today 3 Visit the NAP Online Bookstore

Pay my NAP Dues

Register to attend the National Training Conference

Online: www.parliamentarians.org

By Phone: 1-888-627-2929

By Mail: National Association of Parliamentarians 213 South Main Street Independence, MO 64050

www.parliamentarians.org

41

National

Parliamentarian

®

Official publication of the National Association of Parliamentarians® 213 S. Main Street Independence, MO 64050-3808 816.833.3892 • 888.627.2929 hq@nap2.org • www.parliamentarians.org