Re: Motion to remove the operations manual from the Wiki
HI Susan,
I have often asked to have those who know they are going to prepare motions draft them in electronic form and send them to me so I don't have to type them (in my slow error prone style) for the big screen. A few do, but a lot of our motions are drafted on the spot.
Things do sometimes get out of control at the meetings, but a lot of times to, people wait to be called on.
Thanks
John
__________________
John and Joanne Jones
Registrar-Recorders, American Iris Society
aisregistrar@irises.org
John Jones, Chairman, Electronic Services Committee
aiselectronicsvcs@irises.org
35572 Linda Drive
Fremont, CA 94536
On Mar 14, 2013, at 8:48 AM, Susan Grigg wrote:
> I agree in part with Gary and with John; however, it would be to the Board's
> advantage if committees worked so well that motions that needed to be
> brought to the Board from a committee were prepared ahead of time, presented
> with the committee report, and any necessary amendments done then. Does it
> just involve too much typing or are our committees not functioning well?
>
> Why can't we at least raise hands to be recognized by the President before
> we speak during the Board meeting? Discussions are dominated by anyone who
> talks fast and loud.
>
> Susan Grigg
>
> "Where there is no law, but every man does what is right in his own eyes,
> there is the least of real liberty."
> Henry M. Robert
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aisdiscuss@aisboard.org [mailto:owner-aisdiscuss@aisboard.org]
> On Behalf Of gary white
> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 3:16 PM
> To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
> Subject: Re: [AISdiscuss] Motion to remove the operations manual from the
> Wiki
>
> I agree with all that John has posted below concerning the way we handle
> motions at our spring and fall board meetings. While it has not been
> exactly by Robert's Rules of Order, it has usually worked well in the board
> meeting situation, and sometimes there is a need for considerable discussion
> on a particular topic and there may be several of what Robert's Rules refers
> to as "friendly amendments" on an abbreviated basis. These usually get to
> the same result as if we took the much longer route and made multiple
> amendments, voted on the motions to amend, then voted on the amended
> motions. The easiest way out and still follow Robert's Rules is to make
> suggestions for revision as the motion is being written, but before the
> President announces the motion for discussion. After that, we may not be
> strictly following RR, but as John indicates, it has worked well for us when
> there are "friendly amendments".
>
> But, it is not so easy to do this with electronic motions, especially when
> there may be differing opinions and views on a motion. There is not the
> same ability for all to review the motion and make suggestions for revision
> before it is announced for discussion. There is, by necessity, a prolonged
> discussion and voting time with electronic motions, and there is not the
> same ability to expediently discuss and compromise, etc as at a live board
> meeting.
>
> Thanks,
> Gary
>
> --- On Wed, 3/13/13, John Jones <jijones@usjoneses.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: John Jones <jijones@usjoneses.com>
> Subject: Re: [AISdiscuss] Motion to remove the operations manual from the
> Wiki
> To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
> Date: Wednesday, March 13, 2013, 1:08 PM
>
>
> It is true that Article 10, Section 3 of the AIS By-Laws (4-04-11) states:
> "The parliamentary rules contained in the most recent edition of Robert's
> Rules of Order shall be used in all meetings of the AIS to cover questions
> not provided for in these bylaws."
>
> We may have been playing a little "fast and loose" with Roberts Rules (RRs)
> in the process of making and discussing motions, but I think that what
> evolved over the last several years serves us pretty well. The whole point
> of having motions displayed on the big screen and modifying them as directed
> by the board was to help ensure that the motion gets worded properly to
> effect the action that the board wants. While this may engender a little
> more non-RRs discussion, I believe that it saves time in that we don't have
> to vote to reject a motion only to have it resubmitted in a revised manner,
> changed again etc. None of use are exceptionally adept at constructing
> perfect motions the first time and this provides a reasonable process for us
> to use. Changes are accepted by the originator and seconder prior to a vote
> being taken.
>
> Certainly there are times when discussions drag on but most often they
> proceed pretty quickly. There are lost of times when someone's comment
> brings up an idea for someone that has already spoken and I think that the
> often short period of open discussion we have used in the past serves to
> bring us all to better conclusions. The AIS President maintains control of
> the meeting and can end the discussion if needed or a motion made to Call
> the Question
>
> With the exception of one meeting (when I was in the hospital) I have served
> as Motions Secretary at the pleasure of the Board since we started doing
> this at the Fall 2004 Board meeting. While the process is not strictly
> according to RRs, I think that it serves the intent behind those rules in
> that we accomplish a lot in the period of time that we use. certainly in the
> last 7-8 years we have have has progressively shorter meetings while still
> getting the business done that we need done.
>
> I don't mean to imply that we should continue doing something just because
> that is the way we have done it in the past. We should always be accepting
> of doing things a new way that serves us better,
>
>
> John
> __________________
> John and Joanne Jones
> Registrar-Recorders, American Iris Society aisregistrar@irises.org
>
> John Jones, Chairman, Electronic Services Committee
> aiselectronicsvcs@irises.org
>
> 35572 Linda Drive
> Fremont, CA 94536
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 13, 2013, at 10:13 AM, Ron Killingsworth wrote:
>
>> Michelle, you are correct, the board of AIS usually brings up an idea,
>> talks
> about it, works out the kinks and details, then someone makes a motion,
> someone seconds it, and then the board votes. Technically, nothing is
> supposed to be discussed by the board unless there is a seconded motion
> before the board. This cuts down on a lot of talking and discussion and
> also stops discussion on an idea of only one person. I agree that
> conducting a meeting by a strict interpretation of Robert's Rules of Order
> can make it complicated.
> However, I really think that the board should at least follow the general
> guidelines of Robert's Rules. The rules actually limit the discussion of a
> motion -- i.e., once a person expresses his/her opinion on the motion, that
> person can not again have the floor until everyone has had a chance to
> express an opinion and unless it is agreed by all to extend the discussion.
>> Again, this can get real complicated. But, following the basic rules
>> of
> Roberts will help the meetings to run smoother and cut out some of the two
> hour discussions on a simple matter such as publishing the 2014 calendar.
>>
>> If the original motion maker and the seconder is willing to change the
> motion to something resembling my amendment, I am willing to withdraw my
> amendment (if the person who seconded it agrees) and to allow the amended by
> the original people motion to proceed with discussion.
>>
>> Ron
>> Director, AIS
>> Adv Editor
>>
>> On 3/13/2013 12:04, Michelle Snyder wrote:
>>> I only have the revised 10 edition and it isn't the easiest to
>>> understand,
> at least not to this lay person. Anyway, for as far back as I can remember,
> we have always allowed the members to voice their opinion on an existing
> motion regarding changes but we have also had the changes agreed to by the
> original motion maker and the second, or the originators have agreed to
> withdraw their motion. From what I see from Gary's email, it appears while
> the motion is pending it can be amended several times during the discussion
> process. It appears this could drag out motions for a very long time. If
> we accept the motion to amend as presented, that amended motion would have
> to go through the discussion and voting period (two weeks) and then the
> original motion, possibly as amended, would have to go through the same
> process. This seems like it would stop any motion from going forward in a
> reasonable time frame. Perhaps we should discuss this further at the
> spring board meeting a!
> nd Jim could contact our legal adviser and she could present a definitive
> explanation of how this should work. Have we been doing our amendments to
> pending motions wrong all along?
>>>
>>> During our Spring and Fall board meetings motions have been amended a
>>> lot
> before being voted on.
>>>
>>> Michelle
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
>> <aissecretary@irises.org> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
>> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
> <aissecretary@irises.org>
> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
> <aissecretary@irises.org>
> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
> <aissecretary@irises.org>
> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
<aissecretary@irises.org>
The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
Other Mailing lists |
Author Index |
Date Index |
Subject Index |
Thread Index