Robert's Rules in Real Life

After a dozen years in this business, it seems to me that questions of authority are some of the hardest to resolve.

Over and over I find city councils, boards of directors, and other governing boards struggling with the question, “Who’s in charge here, anyway?” If a group understands certain fundamental principles, it becomes much easier to resolve those tensions and move forward effectively.

During a recent consultation, this sentence from a set of “council rules and procedures” made my hair stand on end:

“All persons present at a meeting must obey the mayor’s orders.”

This rule is profoundly wrong. It may look legitimate, but it isn’t. The mayor, when running a meeting of the city council, is the presiding officer, not a dictator. The presiding officer runs the meeting as the servant of the members. The correct rule is similar to the one cited above, but has a subtle and essential difference:

“All persons present at a meeting must obey the legitimate orders of the presiding officer.”

The legitimate orders of the presiding officer are those issued in accordance with the rules and procedures adopted by the group, to serve the group. And according to Robert’s Rules of Order and common parliamentary law, those orders are subject to appeal by any two members of the group. For example, if the presiding officer declares that someone is speaking off topic and must stop forthwith, the member can say “I appeal.” If another member says “second,” then the group itself will vote to decide whether the member may continue.

Why don’t people know this? Why do councilmembers, county commissioners, directors of special districts and nonprofit board members allow the mayor, the chair or the president to ride roughshod over the group, acting as if he or she were the final authority?

We have lost the common understanding of meeting procedure that grew up in this country when America was alive with associations, astonishing the Frenchman de Tocqueville and English authors who toured the continent. We are used to the image of the “captain of industry,” the hard-charging boss who carries everyone in her wake. We want to be nice and “get along,” and it may seem safer to keep our heads down, letting a bully or an autocrat rule the roost without a challenge.

Members of our community, unite! Elected officials, citizens appointed to commissions and committees, long-suffering volunteers, seize your rights! Repeat after me, THE GROUP IS THE FINAL AUTHORITY. Yes, we have to obey the mayor when the mayor is enforcing the rules we chose, but when the mayor goes off-course or runs amok, he or she must obey US.

Ann G. Macfarlane, PRP

(c) Jurassic Parliament 2012. All rights reserved.

Seldom do we feel inspired to recommend imitating the U.S. Congress, but the House of Representatives did something yesterday that can work for your board or council too.

In the face of a threatened government shut-down (again!), three representatives agreed to a budget extension by saying nothing. The method is called “unanimous consent,” and it is fully supported by Robert’s Rules of Order. In this instance, the chair said, “I ask for unanimous consent to concur in the Senate amendments.” Those members in attendance – all two of them – said nothing, which meant that the motion passed. The government has money through the weekend, and we can all breathe easier.

Similarly, at a nonprofit board meeting or a city council session, the chair can say, “Is there any objection?” If no one speaks up, it means that all the members agree. They have all voted in favor, and the motion passes. When properly used, this is a great way to speed up business.

We’re not thrilled that our representatives had to resort to this procedural work-around to keep the government going. The incident does give us the chance, though, to recommend “unanimous consent” for smaller-scale issues. Learn how to use this technique from our free article, “Unanimous Consent Is a Chair’s Best Friend.”

Ann G. Macfarlane, PRP

© Jurassic Parliament 2011. All rights reserved.

Sports news this week raised a question for those of us who love Robert’s Rules of Order. Did the PAC-12 vote on Tuesday "to not expand"? If so, they might need help in using Robert’s Rules.

One of the basic rules for writing motions – proposals for action – is to write them in positive form. In other words, don’t use the word “not” in setting out what you plan to do.

If your city council doesn’t like the mayor’s proposed appointee to the planning commission, write a motion that says “that Ms. X be appointed to the planning commission,” and then vote it down. Do not phrase your motion this way:  “that the council does not approve the appointment of Ms. X.”

If your student senate wants to protest proposed cuts to the university budget, write a motion that says “we deplore these cuts” or “we condemn these cuts.” Do not phrase your motion to say “we do not approve of these cuts.”

And, if you’re a sports body that doesn’t choose to expand, your motion might say “that our conference expand to 14 teams” – and the board would then defeat the motion. This is clearer than saying “that our conference not expand” and then voting in favor, or, even more ambiguous, voting against. If we vote against not expanding, what action have we taken?

Phrasing motions in the positive helps keep everyone clear about what is intended. You can learn more about this in Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised 10^th edition, page 100.

The passing of former Seattle City Council Clerk Theresa Dunbar was noted in a detailed obituary published on Saturday, June 4, 2011. The Seattle Times described the significant role that the late Ms. Dunbar played in Seattle government. “Both sides of any political squabble trusted her…She really transcended any kind of politics in the city.”

This story highlights yet again the importance of the clerk, often mistakenly seen as a lowly functionary , to our democratic system and our society.

We extend our condolences to Ms. Dunbar’s family on their loss.

Ann G. Macfarlane, PRP

(c) Jurassic Parliament 2011. All rights reserved.