Myths and Half truths concerning parliamentary procedure: Bet you have heard some of these!

Commentary on each:

1. Exofficio members never have right to vote. The term exoffico simply means “by virtue of”. That is, some groups may have the president or vice president as a member of any or all committees; the county agent may be listed as “exoffico” member of the Extension Board; the student body president may be an exoffico member of the community foundation, etc. The State Fair board has an exoffico spot listed for the governor and others. Whether the person filling this spot has voting rights maybe spelled out in the group’s governing documents. The default according to RONR would be that they would have full rights while serving on the board—that is, right to present motion, debate, and vote. Many groups because of either provisions in their governing documents or custom to not allow for full rights (often this is because of the misconception of rights of exoffico). 2. Executive Committee can always over ride decision of whole assembly. The default is that nobody (officer or officers or executive committee) can over ride the will of the assembly. So any such authority must be found other than in their parliamentary authority. On the other hand commonsense says it may be necessary—for example: the body at their annual convention voted to hold the next annual convention on the same corresponding date AND at the same location. Due to other circumstances it is later found that either the date will not work at that site or that site will not be available— so a decision will have to be made by the executive committee (or other designated committee). Such authority is often found in the bylaws such “executive committee has authority to conduct affairs of the association between annual meetings”. 3. Amendments need permission of maker to be included. No such rule exists in any parliamentary authority. Once a motion is presented to the body by the president the maker of the motion has no more ownership than any other member. Now Again—exceptions by rule or custom may exist in some organizations—example: Indiana legislature (do not use RONR) but a person who proposed a motion may withdraw it at any time (at least, this is pretty close to the way they operate.) 4. Organizations must always have a constitution and a bylaws While in the past it was quite common for groups to have both ---the rationale was that the constitution contained those points that were very difficult to change (perhaps notice and 2/3rds vote) and the bylaws contained what were more in the nature of standing rules. Today most organizations only have a set of bylaws which are more of the nature of the old concept of constitution but may contain provisions for some things to only require a majority vote to change. Example: the Indiana FFA, Indiana Young Farmers, IAAE, and many others only operate under a bylaws. Some groups such as National FFA may never change due to circumstances concerning their federal government special status as to recognition. 5. Debate is never in order before a main motion has been presented Many groups have a custom of allowing for some debate before a motion in order that some consensus arises prior to wording of a motion. In general, it is not a recommended practice for large groups but is allowed under “small board rules” and in committees. 6. Parliamentarians make ruling which are subject to appeal Parliamentarians do not make rulings (general nature of the beast) but offer advisory opinions. Generally during a convention setting the parliamentarian is advisor to the presiding officer but may be called up to clarify points to others or the body. Rationale for saying not making rulings: it is within the power of a presiding officer or the body to ignore the parliamentarian’s advice or with limits suspend some provisions of their own standing rules and their parliamentary authority. 7. A person cannot nominate themselves No such rule exist in any commonly used parliamentary authority 8. A member of the nominating committee cannot be nominated No such rule exists in any commonly used parliamentary authority. With this or #7 IF such were the rule then a member is being stripped of one of the generally accepted principles of full membership in the organization. 9. Minutes of previous meeting, committee reports, treasurer’s report must always be adopted by motion Minutes of the previous meeting should be handled simply by consensus: that is, the chair asks if there are any corrections---then say “if there are no corrections (or “if there are no further corrections—“) the minutes stand approved as presented”. Is the reading of the minutes required(oral presentation required)-- no, not if group is using another means of sharing of minutes with the members. In this day of wide use of either email or website the actual reading aloud of the minutes is a time consuming activity. BUT, the minutes should be read upon the request of even one member, unless the group adopts a standing rule contrary to this. Remember bylaws and standing rules can contain rules of conducting a meeting and this over rides the parliamentary authority. (Caution: some of the basic principles of membership should never be to consider acceptable to abridge such as right to “hear and be heard” and right to vote, etc….) Can a new member or a member absent from previous meeting—vote on approval of minutes (if voting is used)---yes, all members have the right to vote even on past material. Committee Reports: presented simply as a report without requesting any action—should not be approved/adopted/etc. by the group---rationale: group would have adopted as their official (and perhaps legal position) every word, phase, grammar error, etc. of the report—so better to simply file. IF the committee is seeking approval of an action (could be even a resolution) then the speaker can on behalf of the committee “the committee moves for ------“ and if moved by the committee (and not just the speaker) then the need for a second has been satisfied (more than one interested) –the second is implied. Treasurer’s report: no action recommended excepting filing with the secretary EXCEPT an audited report. Rationale: what if there is a serious error (or maybe misuse of funds) the group if vote to accept has just accepted a false report. 10. Chair should always ask for “old business” on the agenda The term “old business” is strongly recommended to NEVER be used. In some folks mind this envisions anything from the past so may be opening the door for unintended consequences. So do not use. 11. Chair should always ask for “unfinished business” on agenda There is only a very limited means by which there would be anything like “unfinished business” and the two most likely are: a) some motion was postponed at the last meeting to this meeting or b) some items on the previous meeting agenda were not covered due to adjournment-----in either case, these items would be under the heading of “unfinished business”. NOW: If either of these situations exists---the chair should know that (that is they would know of postponement if they were at the meeting AND it should have been noted in the minutes) and they would be aware the agenda was not completed---SO, nothing postponed to this meeting and no unfinished agenda items THEN there is no reason for “unfinished business” to actually be listed or called for on the agenda for the current meeting.

12. Only the maker of a motion can move to rescind Again, as stated before: once a motion has been turned over to the body (to debate or to vote) the maker of the motion has no more ownership than any other member. A point to ponder: It is in order for person who was absent from the meeting at which a motion was passed OR perhaps not even a member at the time of the motion passing—to move to rescind or amend. This is not an uncommon practice in some governmental groups as a new group of members seek to “undo” a motion passed by a previous group – happens in many groups after an election. Example: school board passes to implement certain policies and after an election the membership has changed enough to “undo” the previous board’s motion. 12. Presiding officer can only vote to break a tie Some confusion still around on this one: Default: president has the same fundamental right to vote as any other member, but as a matter of practice it is common for the president not to vote—UNLESS THEIR VOTE WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. Now that opens the door to a) breaking a tie or b) causing a tie (note: point being that a tied vote loses). So while a president can not be forced to vote (no member can unless in their governing documents) the president is free to cast a vote or not---example: motion is tied—if president favored passage they vote for and the motion passes; if president against passage on a tied vote then simply does nothing and the tied vote dies, or if vote is for example 10 in favor and 9 against—the president by casting a “no” vote helps to kill the motion (or if in favor does nothing). 13. A motion that is debated and voted on but later determined to have never been seconded—is void After debate has started or voting has occurred the lack of a second is immaterial. By virtue of any debate or votes cast the threshold point for a second (more than one interested in considering) has been met. 14. When a member yells “question” debate must stop This old practice is still alive and well in many groups (our local school board for example). The use of calling out the term “question” actually would have only one legitimate point---that is to indicate to the chair that at least one person is ready to close debate but since it takes a 2/3rd vote to close debate then there is no reason only one person should have the power to close debate. POINT: the chair does not have the right to unilaterally do much of anything---the powers of the chair are “derived powers” the main one being agreement of the membership so when a president “is out of control” then it is the authority of the members to stop it. Point: debate can be closed with out a direct vote---chair observing no more interest in debate says “ if there is no more debate then debate will be closed” but even one member can stop this. 15. The chair rules the meeting and can unilaterally close debate, adjourn, and refuse to allow a motion As stated above—no such authority exists for such unilateral action by the presiding officer. 16. The maker of a motion has first AND last right to speak Partially true: the maker of the motion does have the first right to speak to the motion IF they seek recognition (the chair has no obligation to ask them if they want to exercise that right). But they do not have the last right. After their opening debate they have no more rights to debate than any other member, that is, they are limited to two times (unless right is given by body) and must wait their turn to get to speak a second time. 17. “Lay on the table” can be used to delay action to the next meeting or even used to kill consideration Now this one does create a bit of a problem: IF RONR is the group’s parliamentary authority then the statement is false---the correct delay is postpone definitely and the “kill” motion is postpone Indefinitely. But, if using some other parliamentary authority then this may be acceptable. The problem is it is common practice to “lay on the table until our next meeting” or have even heard to meeting far in the future---again, if RONR is the source—then this is completely out of order. NOTE: if postpone definitely the postpone could be for later in the same meeting (or series of meetings) but not beyond the next meeting (special or regular) but not beyond 3 months so can not postpone from one annual meeting to the next. NOTE: A motion that is postponed indefinitely can live again. In fact, it would be in order to be presented at the very next meeting and this same rule applies (generally) to a motion that failed at a meeting. 18. If the presiding officer is a candidate during an election they must give up the chair during the election There is no such provision in RONR. By custom this may be the practice of some groups but no such rule exists. This is one of those points where people believe that IF the presiding officer has an interest (beyond simply as member) they should not preside OR a member should not vote on an item—again no such rule exists. IF the presiding officer can maintain a neutral position while presiding on an issue than they have the right to retain the position. Point to ponder: should candidates for an office leave the room prior to debate and voting, again, one of those old practices that has no basis in provisions in RONR. Example: in the case of voting and causing a member to leave the room the member has been deprived of two of the most basic rights of membership—“right to hear and be heard” and right to vote. What about there being a situation of member hearing debate for or against them or seeing how others voted---reality says they may learn of it anyway so the requiring of them to leave is taking away rights. 19. The candidate with the least number of votes can be dropped before the next voting round This not a rule found anywhere in RONR. While it may make sense to speed along the process the default in RONR is keep all candidates and keep voting until something happens. Some organizations do have such a rule in their governing documents. 20. “Majority” is best defined as 50%+1 While this may work much of the time there are situations it is simply not correct: the rules are that a majority is more than 50% and any factional number must be rounded up. So 100 voters than “50% plus 1 is right on the money of 51. But what if the number is 9----50% is 4.5 +1=5.5 rounded up to whole number is 6--- that is not within the simply definition of majority---so strongly recommended nowhere in governing documents should it have the term “50%+1”. 21. Abstentions automatically count as a “nay” vote The best thing to remember is simply “abstentions do not count as votes”. Thus if a quorum is present but only a portion of the member choose to vote then the requirement of majority or 2/3rd is determined based on votes cast. Example: extreme situation: 50 members in group, 40 at the meeting, vote is taken and 1 vote is cast in favor and 39 people abstain---the motion received a majority of the votes cast thus passes—back to the basic point—abstentions do not count as votes. NOW: could abstentions have the same effect as voting “no”---yes, example: local school board of seven members and state law says motions must have majority vote of the entire membership—so majority of 7 is 4, but in voting due to abstentions the vote is 3 in favor and 2 against (and two members abstain)–due to the state rules the motion will fail. Back to basic rule: a member has the right to abstain AND does not have to give a reason. 22. A person cannot vote for themselves Again, basic rule is every member has the right to vote on every issue---so do have the right to vote for themselves. Always advocate: IF you believe you are the better candidate then why would you “be nice” and vote for someone less qualified.

23. A husband and wife cannot both serve on the executive committee No such rule or even inference in any parliamentary authority. It could be a local rule but not generally a very favorable one as situation may exist whereby family members are the best people for offices. 24. Minutes must be approved before any action can be taken on any motions involved--No Motions passed at a meeting are effective upon passage UNLESS there is a proviso setting the time of implementation at some other time. 25. A person who is absent cannot be elected to an office No such rule exists in any parliamentary authority 26. Minutes must include the name of the “seconder”. Minutes should not include anything but main motions and the maker of that motion (now some groups due to legal advice are taking a standing rule position that the name of the maker will not be included and that is their right.) The motion recorded in the minutes should be the words as stated by the presiding officer when calling for voting—IMPORTANT POINT. 27. Only one motion can be on the floor at any one time Actually there may be several motions “on the floor” at one time in the sense that they are all directly pending or potentially pending. Example: main motion, amendment being considered, refer to committee moved, then lay on the table is moved. While the immediately pending is the lay on the table the other items are still out there if lay on the table is defeated. 27. Business meeting can continue if there is a quorum at the beginning even it is lost later—NO Whatever the quorum that has been set by the governing documents –that number of members (percent, etc.) must be present for the business meeting to continue. Some organizations with difficulty always having a quorum have set their quorum as “whatever number of members present”. Amending the governing documents (constitution, code, bylaws, etc.) must have quorum present to amend. 28. The on-line copy of “Robert’s Rules of Order” is a good reference source—NO The copy on-line is the 1915 edition that is longer under copyright protection. It is the 4th edition (currently in the 11th edition) and should not be used. The name was changed to “Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised” in order to set it apart from the older editions. Be aware that since there is nt copyright protection for “Robert’s Rules of Order” there are publication currently on the market that are not official current material. 29. Any person attending a meeting has the right to speak—NO. In regular meetings of a group only members have the right to speak. Points to ponder: a) If a governmental group holding a “public hearing” then it is generally understood that any person present has the right to seek to speak. b) by consensus or vote the members may give a non member the right to speak. In a governmental meeting this line my become unclear as other governmental officials may be present and while they technically do not have the right to speak it may be common practice that they are allowed—but, again, only with majority of members agreeing. It is possible for the governing body to set time limits on a non-member speaking.