national parliamentarian (vol. 75 no. 1)

Can Creativity Be Taught? — p. 7Growing NAP Internationally — p. 15Explaining and Defusing Tense Parliamentary Situations — p. 17

NatioNalParliameNtariaNVolume 75, No. 1 | First Quarter 2014

Fea

tU

re

S

(Clockwise from far left) Rosalie Stroman Gretchen Denton Virginia Berberick Denise Irminger Darlene Allen Becky Rutz Greg Goodwiller Virginia Harris Maurice S. Henderson

(Clockwise from far left) Mike Chamberlain Evan Lemoine Donna Thompson Kathy Boyer Carrie Dickson Beulah Sutherland Jim Slaughter

Education and crEdEntialingcommittEEMembers of the committee pose with 2011-2013 President Maurice S. Henderson and Executive Director Mike Chamberlain.

Pictured left to right: Jim Jones, Jim Stewart, Ann Guiberson, Maurice S. Henderson, Ann Rempel, Wanda Davis, Mike Chamberlain, Dr. M. Eugene Bierbaum, Dan Seabold

lEadErship confErEncEAttendees participate in group exercises, led by Freddie Colston and Deborah Underwood.

trEasurEr Evan lEmoinEEvan is in his second consecutive term as treasurer and is seen here presenting the treasurer’s report.

Contents3 President’s Message5 From the Editor

News and Information from NAP9 Ordering Materials From NAP

10 Parliamentary Language 14 Quick Quiz22 Words From the Pros28 Mystery Motion 30 Two Minutes of Procedure31 Motion Spotlight32 Parliamentary Myths33 In Memory

36 Answer Key

Articles and Features7 Can Creativity be Taught?

Dave Mezerra, PRP11 The ASSURE Model for Teaching Cynthia Mayo, PRP15 Growing NAP Internationally Karen Watson, PRP17 Explaining and Defusing Tense Parliamentary Situations Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP21 Call for Nominations for the 2014 NAP Educational Foundation Trustee Sandy Olson, PRP25 Unit Spotlight 37 Questions and Answers (1–5)

Volume 75, No. 1 | First Quarter 2014

NatioNalParliameNtariaN

editorTim Wynn, PRP P.O. Box 54Lake Helen, FL [email protected]

assistant editor Carol A. Henselder, PRP

Parliamentaryreview Committee John Rempel, PRP, Chairman Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP Sharon Reed, PRP

National ParliamentarianRegistered U.S. Patent and Trade-mark Office, ISSN 8755-7592. Pub-lished quarterly by the National Association of Parliamentarians.

©2013. All rights to reproduce or reprint any portion of this publica-tion are reserved, except by written permission of the editor. Opinions expressed herein are not necessar-ily endorsed by NAP.

First publication, January 1938.

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

Subscription rates: $30/year or single copy $8.

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

National Parliamentarian® Official publication of the National Association of Parliamentarians®

213 South Main Street • Independence, MO 64050-3808Phone 816.833.3892 (Toll-free 888.627.2929) • Fax 816.833.3893

E-mail: [email protected] • Web: http://parliamentarians.org

2011–2013 National OfficersPresident

Vice-President SecretaryTreasurer

Directors-at-Large

District Director Representatives

Parliamentarian Executive Director

Ann Guiberson, PRPMary L. Randolph, PRPAnn L. Rempel, PRPEvan A. Lemoine, PRPSteve Glanstein, PRPJames N. Jones, PRPJim Stewart, PRP

Denise Irminger, PRPDaniel Ivey-Soto, PRP

Leonard M. Young, PRPMike Chamberlain, PRP

NP Submission Guidelinesnational 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 on CD or via e-mail attachment in Microsoft Word or RTF format. Illustrations, photographic prints and high quality digital photos are welcome. Materials submitted cannot be returned unless special arrangements are made in advance with the editor.

Contributors must submit an “assign-ment and transfer of copyright” form granting to NAP copyright in the work or the right to publish it.

Submission DeadlinesSecond Quarter 2014Third Quarter 2014Fourth Quarter 2014First Quarter 2015

March 1, 2014June 1, 2014

September 1, 2014December 1, 2014

Have you ever thought it might be fun to predict the future? Do you realize that in some ways, you already do know what’s going to happen? For example, you know that tomorrow daylight will follow night; in the fall colorful leaves will appear, and even though you’re freezing today, spring will come with its new birth and warmer days. In another sense you do have the ability to influence and even determine outcomes in your life through the goals you set and determination you have to carry out those goals.

This past biennium the board of directors adopted a new strategic plan. In this biennium it is time for us to start bringing this future from paper into reality by implementing the plan.

Here are some steps we will take to move forward into the future:

Education: First and foremost our focus is on education. NAP’s reason for being is to study, teach, and promote parliamentary procedure. NAP must deliver on the promise of affordable, accessible education programs and services.

The business plan calls for devel-oping the body of knowledge that in-cludes all those skills, competencies, and abilities necessary to be success-ful in learning and applying parlia-

mentary pro-cedure. It goes beyond book knowledge and encompasses the many disciplines in which that book knowledge may be applied. This is a long-term objective that will result in pathways of learning and milestones of achievement available to all members.

In the short term, NAP will deliver more education electronically with regularly scheduled webinars, professional certifying courses, and leadership training for those who are unable to attend in person.

The credentialing program, especially the recertifying course, is a major point of pain. NAP must address this problem now. We can do this by creating modules which focus on education rather than testing. I am happy to say that by March 2014, NAP will offer these courses in classroom and online settings. The professional courses must be made available more often and more cost effectively. The “old” testing format must give way to a “new” diagnostic demonstration of skill in which the participant receives guidance for improvement if necessary. Coupled with mentoring programs, we can have an interesting program in which no one will have to lose his credential.

President’s Message Create the Future

Ann Guiberson, PRP

National Parliamentarian® Official publication of the National Association of Parliamentarians®

213 South Main Street • Independence, MO 64050-3808Phone 816.833.3892 (Toll-free 888.627.2929) • Fax 816.833.3893

E-mail: [email protected] • Web: http://parliamentarians.org

Ann Guiberson, PRP NAP President

First Quarter 2014 3

National Parliamentarian4

Membership: In 2013 we had a wakeup call. Renewal and retention rates were not where they should be. It’s time for us all to realize member-ship marketing is everybody’s job,

not just the district directors and not just the membership chairmen in the associations. We simply can’t afford rules that drive people away or seem designed to keep people out. I believe we have to rethink the membership exam to make it more inviting and friendly. Barriers to membership should be removed, but even more, the value of NAP membership must be clearly articu-lated, consistent, and delivered in a professional manner.

Public Relations: What is it going to take for NAP to be able to be successful in getting the word spread to more and more people and organizations? And, by the way, do it on a shoestring budget? NAP has already moved forward by having a redesigned website. We also have to leverage social media much more than we have been.

The best public relations we can have, however, is by making our circle bigger. Having more

members and more registered parliamentarians doesn’t make the pie smaller for anyone. Making the pie bigger creates more buzz, more people to spread the word, and

more knowledge of the organization. Right now we have huge areas in most states where there are no parliamentarians at all. NAP just doesn’t appear very important

if we’re nowhere. Parliamentarians need to be everywhere.

Financial Stability: Finally, NAP’s financial stability is a major key to accomplishing these goals. We cannot provide great education, great resources, and the service members deserve without adequate financial resources to operate and to fund initiatives that will carry NAP to its highest and best future. NAP must operate in a business-like

manner and yet balance that with the highest level of quality service to members.

We have already adopted the proration of dues. Now you can bring in new members all year long and know that they will not face an unfair dues burden when they join.

President’s Message (continued from previous page)

We simply can’t afford rules that drive people away or seem designed to keep people out.

NAP must deliver on the promise of affordable, accessible education

programs and services.


As the new editor of the National Parliamentarian (NP), I would like to take a moment to introduce myself and to thank the support staff that brings this publication together. But I’ll start by describing a little bit of what’s in store for the next two years.

In this biennium, NP will continue to focus on education and development. The goal is to provide a publication that engages professional, intermediate,

and novice parliamentarians. Whether or not you realize it, if you’re taking an active interest in parliamentary procedure, you’re a parliamentarian. And it is the mission of this publication to assist you in being the best parliamentarian you can be. Whenever possible, NP will include real-world advice from a wide range of professional parliamentarians who serve in many different fields of parliamentary law.

Now, let me circle back around to that introduction. I am president of Perfect Rules Inc., a parliamentary consulting company that I founded along with my brother, Todd. Through this company, we serve clients nationwide, and it is my extreme pleasure to serve as your editor.

From the Editor

We will explore other avenues to create additional nondues revenue streams as well. From grants, to online programs, to new educational materials—NAP must develop a realistic strategy for how to expand the planned giving program and the fundraising programs.

I believe we have a strong leadership team and NAP has a

wealth of wonderful members who are eager to move forward. Our strategic plan is now the driving force for agendas, board meetings, and must become the focus of successive administrations as well. That’s the way to become powerful. That’s the way to achieve positive accomplishments. That’s the way we will create the future.

Tim Wynn, PRP

New Registered Parliamentarians!NP congratulates the following individuals for attaining

the status of Registered Parliamentarian:

Wesley Waddle, KentuckyCarol Johnson Davis, Georgia

Dr. R. Richard Tribble, Jr., IllinoisLeonora Branca, California


From the Editor (continued from previous page)

NP relies on the talent of NAP members who generously donate articles of interest and insight. The publication receives news, information, and support from the efficient staff at NAP Headquarters. And many thanks must be given to the Parliamentary Research Committee, which handles the Q&A feature. Finally, I would like to thank the NP Review Committee and Assistant Editor Carol A. Henselder.

John Rempel, MD, PRP

Sharon Reed, PRP Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP

NP Review Committee

New Registered Parliamentarians!NP congratulates the following individuals for attaining

the status of Registered Parliamentarian:

Wesley Waddle, KentuckyCarol Johnson Davis, Georgia

Dr. R. Richard Tribble, Jr., IllinoisLeonora Branca, California

As the story goes, an experienced parliamentarian was having dinner at home and said to his wife, “Your homemade biscuits are good, but maybe they could be improved with a little shortening.” To this his wife replied, “And so could your longwinded classes on Robert’s Rules of Order!”

Many of us are aficionados of Robert’s Rules and are extremely knowledgeable as we teach classes on meeting-management skills, bylaw revisions, officer roles, writ-ing minutes, motions and their uses, etc., etc. But—if those instructional

sessions mainly involve PowerPoint slide after PowerPoint slide, reading aloud sections of RONR, reading verbatim from a handout, or just lectures and more lectures—did you ever stop to think about the impact on the students? I offer that the one word a parliamentary teacher must continuously keep in mind is the word creativity.

Put yourself in the shoes of a lis-tener brand new to the complexities of parliamentary procedure who hears a presenter talk and talk and talk about the history of Robert’s Rules, about the use of Latin (pro tempore) and parliamentary terms

(previous question), the intricacies of incidental motions (objection to consideration), or the proper lan-guage of a presiding officer (“It is moved and seconded…”). With no interaction sought, no practical as-sistance on running better meet-

ings, and nothing but a technical lecture, is it any wonder that nonaficio-nados can feel turned off by Robert and his many rules?

Alexis Ohanian (a tech entre-preneur) has hypothesized that the best way to be creative is to surround yourself with creative people. In his article “How do you stay creative?” (Spirit Maga-zine, November 2013) he posits that you are the average of the five people you spend the most time with, and goes on to make the fol-lowing recommendation: “Surround yourself with people who are doing interesting things, who are thinking interesting thoughts, who challenge you to be better, who come from a diverse set of backgrounds and ex-periences.”

Dave Mezerra, PRP

Can Creativity Be Taught?Dave Mezerra, PRP


“…you are the average of the five people you spend the most

time with…”

Can Creativity be Taught? (continued from previous page)

So surround yourself with cre-ative individuals—both parliamen-tarians and non—and surround yourself with creative input. At conventions and national training conferences, attend workshops pre-sented by other parliamentarians.

Ask permission to “steal” approach-es and ideas from your peers (with proper credit). Every time you see a unique television commercial, every time you read a fun Sunday comic strip, every time you play a game, file away an idea that might lead to a new and different approach to a par-liamentary lesson. Here’s a case in point: the magazine article above!

As a teacher of parliamentary classes, always be on the lookout for creative styles or gimmicks to enhance your presentations. Abhor straight lecture style. Don’t just rely on Q&A to involve the audience. Determine long before the presentation how to make the task fun and not a bore. Easier said than done?

We’ve all probably thought about (or even tried) using such games as

Parliamentary BINGO or Jeopardy! to enliven our Q&A sessions. Those are a good start. But why not try to adapt other word games or manipu-latives to engage your participants? Board games and parlor games such as Charades, Apples to Apples, Hed-

Banz, Name 5 Game, Ur-ban Myth, Trivial Pursuit or Catchphrase could each be customized to fit a parliamentary topic. They can be a teaching tool and get the students involved in the learning

process without them even realizing that they are sitting through a les-son. Make it fun for them. They’ll stay in tune much more and not doze during a lecture.

Alexis Ohanian further exemplifies in his article that combining input and observations from all around you, along with your own personal “you,” is the perfect breeding ground for great

ideas. The better you understand that your students are grasping the subject being taught through a variety of learning modes (auditory, visual and kinesthetic), the better


Board games and parlor games …could each be customized to fit

a parliamentary topic.

… always be on the lookout for creative styles or gimmicks to

enhance your presentations.

you’ll be able to make the message meaningful and easy to assimilate. Don’t just talk … don’t just have the students read … get them involved in the process. And how do you do that? Be creative! Use simulations. Involve the students in dialogues. Play board games or word games. Have the students create their own

questions. Have the students act out roles. Work in pairs or small groups. Try magic tricks. Wave red flags. Assign treasure hunt challenges in RONR. Use manipulatives. Challenge the students. Get them physically involved. Give them rewards. Be creative and have fun doing it. They’ll love you for it!


ORDERINg MATERIALS FROM NAP Five ways to order:

1) By Mail: 213 South Main Street Independence, MO 64050-3808

2) By Phone: (888) 627-2929 3) By Fax: (816) 833-38934) By E-mail: [email protected]) On the Web: http://parliamentarians.org

Categories of Materials Available Include:

Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised 11th Edition Materials

Other Parliamentary Manuals

Eletronic Resources

Meeting Resources

Leadership Spotlights

Parliamentary Reference CardsParliamentary StudyPathways to ProficiencyReferencesParliamentary Supplies

Teaching Resources

Resource descriptions and a complete order form are available at the NAP Online Store: http://parliamentarians.org/store/newstore.php


PARLIAMENTARy LANguAgEThe world of parliamentary law has its own precise and

unique language. Mastering this language is an important step in gaining a fuller understanding of proper procedure.

Point of What!In meetings all across this planet, you’re likely to hear members

calling for different points: Point of Privilege; Point of Parliamentary Procedure; Point of Order; Point of Information; Point of Personal Inquiry.

Since RONR (11th ed.) converted “Point of Information” to “Request for Information,” there is only one Point* in the book, now. That is a Point of Order.

So, if you’re not making a Point of Order (i.e. pointing out a violation of the rules), put your pointer away, because you’re probably Requesting, Inquiring, or Rising.

Motion: Point of Order Purpose: A member points out a violation of the rules. Proper Wording to Use: Point of Order!

Motion: Parliamentary Inquiry Purpose: A member asks the chair a pertinent question on parliamentary procedure.Proper Wording to Use: I rise to a parliamentary inquiry.

Motion: Request for InformationPurpose: A member requests information relevant to the business at hand but not related to parliamentary procedure.Proper Wording to Use: I have a request* for information.

Motion: Raise a Question of PrivilegePurpose: A member introduces an urgent request or main motion related to the rights of the assembly or any its members.Proper Wording to Use: I rise to a question of privilege.

*Point of Information is still acceptable, though it is no longer the preferred term.

When teaching parliamentary procedure, an interactive process is needed in order to assure that participants can apply what has been taught. One method is to use the ASSURE Model, a model that is currently used to create interactive learning experiences for online teaching.

The ASSURE Model employs six steps that provide the interaction needed for participants to apply what has been taught. The steps are as follows:

a. Analyze participants

b. State objectives

c. Select strategies, technology, media, and materials

d. Utilize technology, media, and materials

e. Require learner participation

f. Evaluate and revise

Each of these will be discussed in the paragraphs to follow.

1. Analyze participants. Most organizations know little about the basics of properly conducting a business meeting. Determine what participants know about the topic, and determine the learning styles of participants. It is customary to think that a

mature audience may learn from just presentation and handouts, but interactivity is required for all.

2. State objectives. Develop objec-tives that are SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and timely). Use performance terms, such as analyze, demon-strate, practice, apply, arrange, build, classify, compare, com-plete, conduct, define, evalu-ate, manipulate, outline, solve, write, etc.

3. Select strategies, technology, media, and materials. The strategies are activities you will use to present the information. You must develop group-centered strategies, which are those that engage students in active learning, such as the opportunity to plan and conduct a meeting, or develop a case study involving the processing of a motion. The main point in selecting the

Cynthia Mayo, PRP

The ASSuRE Model for Teaching Leadership DevelopmentCynthia Mayo, PRP


The ASSURE Model for Teaching Leadership Development (continued from previous page)

strategies is that they will result in participants’ achievement of objectives.

When selecting technology, media, and materials, consider the diverse needs and interest levels of participants. The com-ponents should be interrelated and should align with the objec-tives. The National Association of Parliamentarians has a variety of materials that may be purchased.

4. Utilize the technology, media, and materials. Follow the four Ps: Process, Preview (the technol-ogy, media, and materials), Pre-pare (the environment and the learning experiences), and Pres-ent (interactivity.)

5. Require learner participation. This is a very important step to-ward meeting the objectives. Par-ticipants need to have experience and practice in applying, analyz-ing, synthesizing, and evaluat-

ing, rather than just memorizing information. Try the following tips for delivering better presen-tations:

• Stand up when presenting

• Face participants

• Maintain eye contact

• Do not read the presentation

• Show passion for what you are teaching

• Use a natural conversational style

• Relate to participants

6. Evaluate and revise. Evaluate the learners’ achievement by an-swering the following two ques-tions: Did the participants learn what they were required to learn? Can they demonstrate the ca-pabilities specified in the stated objectives? From the answers to those questions, revise the com-ponents to increase effectiveness.

SummaryThe ASSURE Model is an excellent tool to assure that leadership

development (parliamentary procedure) can be taught by engaging the participants. The model incorporates important factors that assure learning by adding key questions:

● Who is the audience?

● What are the learning objectives?

● How will participants be engaged?

● How will it be evaluated?


(continued on page 18)

ASSuRE Model Template

Listed below is the ASSURE Model Template: the key to learning and engagement.

analyze learners

• Describe the participants

• Describe the types of knowledge expected of the participants before instruction

State Objectives List objectives based on SMART measures:

• Specific

• Measurable

• Attainable

• Realistic

• Timely

Select Strategies, Technology, Media, and Materials

• Describe all strategies, technology, media, and materials that align with the objectives

Utilize Technology, Media, and materials

• Preview technology, media, and materials (TMM)

• Prepare and practice using TMM

• Prepare the environment

• Prepare the participants

• Provide the learning experience

• Require Learner Participation

• Require active, mental engagement by learners

• Engage learners in practice of the knowledge and skills

• Provide performance feedback

evaluate and revise

• Use assessments that determine learner achievement of objectives

• Examine the entire instructional process and the impact of using technology and media

• Revise as needed

ReferencesFenrich, P. (2005). Creating instructional multimedia solutions: Practical guide-

lines for the real world. Santa Rosa: Informing Science Press, pp. 5-25.Smaldino, S.E., Lowther, D.L., & Russell, J.D. (2008). Instructional technology

and media for learning (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, Pearson Publishing Co.Excellent tool for further understanding of the ASSURE Model http://itchybon1.

tripod.com/hrd/id15.html


(continued on page 18)


QuICk QuIz

It’s time for a Quick Quiz, to refresh your knowledge and sharpen your skills. Answers are found in the back of this publication. Be careful; some of these are tricky.

1. How many members voted for a motion that was adopted by unanimous consent?

a. Every member in the organizationb. Every member at the meetingc. Every member who votedd. None

2. There are three steps that bring a question before the

assembly. Can you name them?

I. _____________________________________________

II. _____________________________________________

III. _____________________________________________

3. Once the motion has been placed before the assembly, there are three steps in the consideration of the motion. Can you name them?

I. ______________________________________________

II. ______________________________________________

III. ______________________________________________

How does NAP promote international growth without international members? NAP President Ann Guiberson has appointed a special committee during her term to investigate international areas for potential NAP growth.

This special committee is exploring how NAP can assist its current members residing outside the United States in recruiting fellow compatriots to NAP. Perhaps just as significant, the committee is asking what NAP has to offer individuals residing outside the United States that would make them want to become members.

The work of this special com-mittee covers many issues. Thus it has created four subcommittees. The first, Intellectual Sharing, is re-

searching how the content of Rob-ert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised 11th Edition is distributed and how NAP might be a part of this process. The second, Published Materials, is investigating the publication of ma-

terials of par-l i a m e n t a r y procedure in languages other than English, thereby giving non-Eng-lish-speaking individuals increased opportunities to study parliamenta-ry procedure. The third, Marketing Partnerships, is exploring possible partnerships with organizations (in-side and outside the United States) with established international affili-ates needing assistance with parlia-mentary procedure. And, the fourth, Cultural Awareness, is reviewing

current NAP material for cultural bias.

Development of new NAP services, policies, and/or procedures may arise from the findings of this committee. Would an individual looking at the website realize that NAP is an

international organization? How can a member residing outside the United States ever be appointed to an NAP national-level committee without the monetary resources to regularly travel to meetings? Is

Karen Watson, PRP

growing NAP InternationallyKaren Watson, PRP

Is there assurance that the foreign-language parliamentary

material has the same intellectual credibility as the original

English version?


Growing NAP Internationally (continued from previous page)

there assurance that the foreign language parliamentary material has the same intellectual credibility as the original English version? How can any organization, regardless of location, be assisted by NAP in regards to parliamentary procedure?

While the world “shrinks” with advancement of technologies, the need for parliamentary procedure increases. President Guiberson ac-knowledges that, although this com-mittee’s work has only just begun, it is likely to continue well into the future and beyond her term. Cur-rent committee members—who col-

lectively speak seven languages—are from diverse backgrounds and loca-tions: Chair Karen Watson (Mid-west United States), Lorenzo Cuesta (Western United States), Don Freese (Canada), Susan Glanstein (Pacific United States), Dr. William Puette

(Pacific United States), Daniel Ross (Japan), and Ma-ria Truijillo-Tough (Western United States).

As significant work goes forward, there is hope that NAP members will embrace the work of this special committee! NAP members who would like more information and those interested in serving on the committee are en-couraged to contact Karen Watson, chair of the special committee.

Karen Watson, PRP, serves NAP at the local, state, and national levels and was awarded ‘Parliamentarian of the Year 2013’ from NSAP.


… although this committee’s work has only just begun, it is likely to continue

well into the future …

There were two different groups with two different problems, Group Alpha and Group Bravo1. Both organizations had adopted the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised—RONR (11th ed.). Their problems were different, but both had the potential for exploding on the floor during the meeting. The solutions to these problems, however, had much in common. They both involved explaining what was happening and how to fix the problem.

The meeting of Group Alpha promised to be contentious. This group was known for being contentious, and long; one previous meeting lasted over four hours. The chair of this meeting, at her request, was briefed on how to handle disruptions; the parliamentarian expected problems. A proposed amendment to their “policy book” was being offered again, and

there was a problem. The bylaws of the group did not permit the membership meeting to propose any amendment to the policy book; only the board of the society or a percentage of members, by petition, could propose the changes—RONR

(11th ed.), p. 483, ll. 9-13. Once proposed, the amendment would then be sent to the members by mail ballot. The issue had come up at a previous meeting, which caused plenty of controversy.

The “contentious” meeting of Group Alpha turned out to last for 39 minutes, and the chair did not have to rule anyone out of order. While there were winners and losers at the

meeting, most, if not all, of the participants accepted the procedure and ended the meeting with the sense of being treated fairly. How was this possible?

The member, instead of offering the proposed

amendment, offered a resolution, “recommending” that the board submit an amendment to the policy book —RONR (11th ed.), p. 100, ll. 18-21. Such a motion would not bind the board, but it would give the board a good idea of the sense of the

Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP

Explaining and Defusing Tense Parliamentary SituationsJonathan M. Jacobs, PRP

This group was known for being contentious, and long;

one previous meeting lasted over four hours.


membership on the proposal (it lost overwhelmingly). What made the change happen?

The meeting of Group Bravo promised to be even more conten-tious. Group Bravo met about once every six months, in May and Oc-

tober, and conducted its election of board members by mail. The results were to be announced at the Oc-tober meeting. The problem, this time, was that no one mailed out the ballots. There was talk of censuring the current officers. The meeting promised to be confusing and con-tentious.

While the meeting lasted for three hours, the method for handling the election lasted well less than an hour, without the chair having to rule anyone out of order. How was this even possible?

First, the meeting adopted a motion to Fix the Time to Which To Adjourn and scheduled an adjourned meeting for several months later, but before the next regular meeting—RONR (11th ed.), pp. 93-94. Second, they adopted a motion setting a time for

the ballots to go out and a deadline for which they had to be returned; as this was a motion to, in effect, close the polls, the motion required a two-thirds vote—RONR (11th ed.), p. 284, ll. 11-12. This deadline gave the tell-ers enough time to count the votes

and report the results at the adjourned meeting. The votes on these mo-tions were unanimous, including the votes of the affected candidates for of-fice. The election was con-

ducted (which ended in a tie for one seat and required another round of voting).

So, how did both of these groups solve these potentially contentious problems? The parliamentarian (in this case the author) explained it to them. How it was explained in each case differed greatly. It was not only that the advice for each dissimilar

situation was different, but the mechanics of how the explanation was given was very different.

In the case of Group Alpha, the member wishing to amend the policy book submitted the

The problem, this time, was that no one mailed out the ballots.

There was talk of censuring the current officers. The meeting promised to be confusing and contentious.

Explaining and Defusing Tense Parliamentary Situations (continued from previous page)


amendment to the president of the organization2. The president, who thought there was a problem, sent it to the parliamentarian. The parliamentarian reviewed the bylaws and noted that the meeting of Group Alpha could not amend

the policy book. He also advised the president, in writing, that a nonbinding motion to “recommend” to the board that they propose such an amendment would be in order; he drafted a motion to do that. He also explained this to the member, who understood that if she made her original motion, it would be the parliamentarian’s advice to the chair that that the motion is out of order, but that he would advise the chair that a motion making a “recommendation,” similar to the one drafted, would be in order, though it would not be binding on the board. This was done outside of the meeting.

In the case of Group Bravo, the president of the organization contacted the parliamentarian and asked what could be done. He

then suggested to the board that the parliamentarian be invited to the meeting to explain this. At the regular meeting, the method for holding the adjourned meeting was explained by the parliamentarian, with the permission of the assembly.

Draft motions were also submitted, with the clear understanding that it would be up to the members there to adopt the motions. The time and location of the adjourned meeting and the details of when the ballots

would be mailed, accepted, and counted were left to the assembly; this was done within the meeting.

Both of these situations were handled differently in the mechanics of how the advice was given. In the case of Group Alpha, the explanation was given to the chair (and then to the member). The member was aware that the parliamentarian

would advise the chair that the motion, as worded, violated the bylaws. An alternative, which, if adopted, did not compel the board to draft and submit an amendment to the policy book, could still be made. The issue could be discussed

So, how did both of these groups solve these potentially

contentious problems?

… the president of the organization contacted the parliamentarian and asked what could be done.


and the opinion of the members attending could be determined. The member understood the bylaws would prohibit the action she originally proposed. And she realized a pantomime of ruling the motion out of order and then attempting to draft a motion that was in order on the floor3 was a lot less effective than simply offering the “recommendation” resolution from the start. The only difference between the traditional role of the parliamentarian advising the chair and this practice was that the person making the motion was eventually brought into the discussion.

In Group Bravo’s case, there was a different mechanism: the parliamentarian spoke directly to the assembly. RONR (11th ed.), p. 466, ll. 30-32, notes, “Only on the most involved matters should the parliamentarian actually be called upon to speak to the assembly; and the practice should be avoided if at all possible.” In this situation—with

a group, like most groups, that did not know that there could be an adjourned meeting, much less how to continue on with the election—it was easily a “most involved” situation.

In both cases, the chair was thoroughly briefed, in writing. The chair and the members involved understood what they were doing. And they understood the effects of their actions. The decisions rested with the people involved; they knew, however, that their decisions would be within the rules.

In each case, it also did some-thing else. It defused a potentially contentious situation. The members understood what was happening and why the chair would be permit-ting the action. In both cases, it built trust in the officers that they were at least attempting to act in accordance to the rules of the organization. That understanding and trust helped de-fuse these potentially contentious situations.

End Notes1 Both are based on real organizations, but are being labeled pseudonymously here. 2 The Bylaws of Group Alpha required notice of all motions.3 In some cases, this type of consultation may be needed as well when the motion is

made at a meeting. See RONR (11th ed.), p. 39, ll. 17-22.

Work CitedRobert, Henry M., Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised, 11th Edition. Eds. Sarah

Corbin Robert, et. al., Philadelphia: Da Capo Press, 2011

Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP, CPP, of Philadelphia, PA is the outgoing president of the Pennsylvania Association of Parliamentarians, Inc., and the still-staying secretary of the Delaware Valley Unit.

Explaining and Defusing Tense Parliamentary Situations (continued from previous page)


This is a call for nominations for the three NAP Educational Foundation trustee positions open in August 2014. Nominations must be made from Annual and Life Contributors of the NAP Educational Foundation.

The NAP Educational Founda-tion is making available many op-portunities in youth leadership and education. The Foundation has sponsored three students last year as youth scholars. The Foundation has also assisted in bringing to the biennial convention a representa-tive from the youth partnerships by assisting with the costs associated with their leadership experience.

Trustees have also planned, implemented, and completed successful fundraisers, including a silent and live auction, bringing in additional funds for the 2014 Youth Day in Oklahoma City. The Foundation has sponsored the purchase of software allowing for web meetings and web education.

The trustees meet by teleconfer-ence every other month in consulta-tion for future activities. This group of leaders is very busy and dedicated to gaining funds for additional im-provements to youth leadership and professional education advance-ment. If you know of any individu-als who are willing to dedicate time, money, and energy into completing

the various projects of the Founda-tion, please send the names and brief bios to Sandy Olson, PRP, president of the NAP Educational Foundation, by the dates appearing on the NAP Educational Foundation website. Three trustees will be com-pleting their first complete terms on the board in August, 2014.

Responsibilities include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Attend all trustee meetings, which are held electronically.

• Work in preparation for and at each NAPEF event.

• Solicit donations for the Annual NAPEF auction.

• Serve as a committee chairman and support the other committees.

• Actively promote the NAPEF among NAP members.

• Annually make a financial contribution to NAPEF.

For a description of the process, please see the news page of the NAPEF.org website.

Sandy Olson, PRP

Call for Nominations for the 2014NAP Educational Foundation TrusteeSandy Olson, PRP



Words From the Pros

In this feature, professional parliamentarians offer some advice from their experiences in the parliamentary world.

Question: What was the most surprising thing about your first jobs as a parliamentarian?

Everything was new. Everything was surprising. If I had to pick one thing, I would say that the “most surprising” thing would be that I didn’t need to instantly recall all 700+ pages of Robert’s Rules of Order. Everything I needed to know for this initial gig comprised like 2% of The Book.

- Kim Goldsworthy, PRP

That, after whispering my advice to the chair, he announced loudly, “On the advice of the parliamentarian … ”

- Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP

It surprises me how ‘revered’ the client will treat a parliamentarian.

- Karen Watson, PRP

Question: What is your method for keeping notes during a meeting at which you are serving as parliamentarian?

It’s a system (formulated by trial and error). But, at the end of the meeting, I can recite back exactly what happened during the meeting and at what time – much like a scorekeeper for a baseball game. It’s a really neat skill I think I have developed.

- Karen Watson, PRP

Pictographs


I finally got around to buying a notebook. For the longest time, I merely depended on the hotel’s free note pads for taking my notes.



Question: What advice would you give about taking that first call from a prospective client?

Remember to get contact information. A name, a title, a phone number, an e-mail address. After that, get a date and a location of the meeting. And when you save the text file on your computer, include the date and time of the telephone call, because often that call will be part of the billable items in your invoice, assuming the gig is landed. In your invoice, under “miscellaneous,” you will write, “Wed. Nov. 20, 2013, 4:58 p.m., 20 minutes; initial consultation by phone; $0.00,” thus showing that you, as a professional, do

take every client communication seriously enough to document it thoroughly, even if you don’t charge for that specific communication.


Know in advance what services you offer and what you charge. Then, stick to it.

- Karen Watson, PRP

Get the name of the client, the group, the issue, and the address to mail the bill.


Question: What advice would you give to a new parliamentarian who is giving a training seminar to a new client?

Develop a “stock program” that can be modified for the group.


Make sure there is an extensive, verbal practice session!

- Karen Watson, PRP

Don’t get hung up on present-ing “your” lesson. It is much more meaningful and wise to answer their questions of their past mis-takes, their recent mishaps . . .


Word From the Pros (continued from previous page)


Question: What would be your biggest tip for preparing for the RP exam?

Learn the terminology, not just the rule. I have found that the exact term and phraseology is sometimes the key data in answering an examination question. For example, there is a difference between the two phrases, “fix the time to which to adjourn” (to set a future meeting date/time of the current session) vs. “fix the time at which to adjourn” (to set the hour to end the meeting).


Study to understand the principles behind parliamentary law as much as knowing answers to the exam. Read Parliamentary Law; and, in RONR, read the Preface, Introduction, and section on Principles Underlying Parliamentary Law.

- Karen Watson, PRP

Do simulations of the test, repeatedly.


Question: What advice would you give to a new parliamentarian who is consulting on a bylaw revision?

You are writing something that may be around for decades. Think broadly and don’t make any mistakes.


Clarify with the members of the organization what they desire the structure of the organization to be. Then, strategize the revision in the bylaws.

- Karen Watson, PRP

Mistakes in spelling and gram-mar are common. I feel that it is part of my job to offer corrections in areas like spelling and grammar as well as parliamentary procedure. It is a given that a parliamentarian will find the errors in logic, and find inconsistencies, and find gaps. Your recommendations should include (a.) where to make changes in cur-rent wording; (b.) adding rules, or adding language, to better cover the thinner areas.


Santa Fe Trail Unit members: (left to right) Historian Joy Freeland; Linda Sehrt (prospective member); Carolyn Tillman; Vice President Shirley McCarty; Charter Member Mary Pisciotta (holding anniversary cake); Fred Larsen; Treasurer Teresa Dean; Bobbie Nicholson-Stevenson; Jane Sharon.


unit Spotlight

The Unit featured in this spotlight has recently celebrated its 50th year. NP would like to congratulate the Santa Fe Trail Unit for promoting parliamentary procedure for a half century.

Santa Fe Trail unitUnit formed: September 1963Current Members: 22Meeting Place:

Trinity Episcopal Church Independence, MO

Meeting Time: 3rd Thursday, 7:00 p.m., except Dec, Jun, Jul and Aug

Unit Dues: $7Registered Members:

3 PRPs, 1 PRP-R, 5 RPs

The unit celebrated this mile-stone in September 2013. What is the secret to this unit’s enduring success? NP asked a few questions on that very subject.

What do you do to attract new members?

Meeting notices are sent to the local newspapers and a tradition of hosting a workshop continues from

Unit Spotlight (continued from previous page)

In MemoriamNP commemorates the following members who have passed from our midst;

may they rest in peace:

Jean S. Mostrom, CaliforniaPhyllis J. Wood, FloridaCecina Koeijmans, Texas

Gretta S. Baur, UtahElizabeth Pav, Louisiana

Portia “Shirley” Chapman, Colorado (the great-granddaughter of Henry M. Robert)

Alice E. Ragona, ColoradoPatricia D. Hammers, California

Nancy G. Hansford, OhioRussell E. Wingfield, Louisiana


the 1964 inaugural event, where members of the public interested in parliamentary procedure are invited.

How do you make learning fun for your members?

Participation in scripts during programs, covering a variety of topics; getting new members involved in the programs and other unit activities; trivia challenge with a few questions at each meeting about procedure and the unit’s history.

How do you encourage provisionals to become members?

Offer annual study groups and provide one-on-one sessions upon request. Work to make meetings fun and informational.

How do you encourage members to pursue registration and professional registration?

Study groups are formed and meetings continue to focus on our mission statement, which is to promote the study, teaching and use of good parliamentary procedure.

What’s the biggest struggle that your unit faces?

Member retention and finding new outlets to expose individuals to parliamentary law.

Your unit is most proud of which accomplishments over the last several years?

Producing a number of MSAP and NAP officers that got their start in the Santa Fe Trail Unit.

How will your unit celebrate parliamentary law month?

Display in local libraries, emphasis in materials at the unit’s April workshop.

What advice would you give to other units?

Have an element of fun in your meetings to keep those attending engaged and open to learning. Who says parliamentary procedure has to be dull?

How do you engage the public and local organizations?

Send monthly meeting notices to the newspaper and keep leaders in the community—and civic organizations as well as other units—on our mailing list for the annual April workshop.

How do you spread the word about the benefits of parliamen-tary procedure and NAP?

Through the unit’s monthly scheduled meetings and annual workshop. Several unit members use the knowledge from study opportunities to make meetings

In MemoriamNP commemorates the following members who have passed from our midst;

may they rest in peace:

Jean S. Mostrom, CaliforniaPhyllis J. Wood, FloridaCecina Koeijmans, Texas

Gretta S. Baur, UtahElizabeth Pav, Louisiana

Portia “Shirley” Chapman, Colorado (the great-granddaughter of Henry M. Robert)

Alice E. Ragona, ColoradoPatricia D. Hammers, California

Nancy G. Hansford, OhioRussell E. Wingfield, Louisiana


more efficient in other organi-zations to which they belong.

In the new biennium, how do you plan to lead the way to “Create the Future” of NAP?

Unit members have long volunteered with organizations such as Skills USA, as trainers and judges, for competitions

using parliamentary procedure and knowledge of parliamentary law. Continuing the unit’s annual workshop and offering study groups to support members’ interest in both the national association and general study of parliamentary procedure. Bringing an awareness of the topic through the use of technology.

MySTERy MOTION

See if you can uncover the identity of the mystery motions below by reviewing the clues. Report to the back of this issue to find out

if you nabbed the right suspect.

Mystery Motion 1 (easy) I am used to modify the wording of a pending motion.

Mystery Motion 2 (easy) I can be used to create a short in-termission in a meeting, but I do not close the meeting.

Mystery Motion 3 (easy) I am the highest-ranking sub-sidiary motion, along with being one of the most widely misused.

Mystery Motion 4 (intermediate) I can be used to close debate on a pending motion, but I can’t impose an immediate closing of debate.

Mystery Motion 5 (intermediate) I’m not out of order, but I’m not necessary. If I am made, a vote is never taken on me. And, just to be clear, the chair never rules on me, either.

Mystery Motion 6 (intermediate) I can only be made by a member who voted on the prevailing side of the motion to which I am to apply.

Mystery Motion 7 (intermediate) I can allow the assembly to do something that it could not oth-erwise do without violating one or more of its regular rules. In most circumstances, I require a two-thirds vote for adoption.

Mystery Motion 8 (intermediate) Although many people might think I bring a meeting to an end, I’m actually used to create a meeting.

Mystery Motion 9 (difficult)I’m a debatable incidental motion

that requires a second, but I’m not amendable.

Mystery Motion 10 (difficult)Only an affirmative vote on me can

be reconsidered.

New Professional Registered Parliamentarians!NP congratulates the following individuals for attaining the

highest credential awarded by the National Association of Parliamentarians:

John R. Berg, WashingtonDonald I. Garrett, Virginia

Lori A. Lukinuk, Ontario CanadaMichael C. Taliercio, North Carolina


New Professional Registered Parliamentarians!NP congratulates the following individuals for attaining the

highest credential awarded by the National Association of Parliamentarians:

John R. Berg, WashingtonDonald I. Garrett, Virginia

Lori A. Lukinuk, Ontario CanadaMichael C. Taliercio, North Carolina

(Left to right) Mary Randolph, Gwen Brown, Henry M. Robert III, Sandy Olson, NancySylvester, Mike Chamberlain, Ann Guiberson, Maurice S. Henderson



TWO MINuTES OF PROCEDuRESecond

The purpose of a second is to prevent time from being wasted by the assembly in having to dispose of a motion that only one member wants to see introduced.

Any member can second another member’s motion and need not obtain the floor to do so. The member simply says, “I second the motion,” “I second it,” or “Second!”

Becoming a seconder carries no burdens or responsibilities. It doesn’t imply that you are in favor of or opposed to the motion. It simply means you want to see it come before the assembly. You’re free to speak against it in debate, move to amend it, and vote against it.

If a motion doesn’t receive a second, it dies, and the assembly moves on to the next item of business.

Oops! If the chair accidentally begins to place before the assembly a motion that has not received a second, any member can point out the mistake and prevent the motion from being considered, so long as it remains without a second. However, keep your eyes open, because if nobody catches the mistake by the time debate or voting has begun, the motion no longer requires a second, and it gets to stay. That’s right: once debate or voting begins on a motion, a second is no longer necessary. And any motion that is adopted without having received a second is nonetheless adopted, just as if it had received a second.

In committees and small boards, seconds are not required.

The chair should refrain from seconding motions, in order to preserve the appearance of im-partiality.

The name of the seconder does not go into the minutes, unless ordered by the assembly.

See RONR (11th ed.), p. 35-37.


MOTION SPOTLIghTSecondary Amendment

Do you know what a secondary amendment is and how to use it? Are you sure? When the best parliamentary teams in the country compete in parliamentary competitions, they are frequently required to demonstrate a secondary amendment, and only about 10-20% percent tend to get it right.

Sometimes an entire day of competition will see not one team properly execute a secondary amendment. However, these teams generally believe they’ve pulled it off. So, what is so tricky about a secondary amendment?

The most common mistake is to simply amend the main motion a second time. That does not constitute a secondary amendment. A secondary amendment proposes to change a primary amendment. This means that a secondary amendment can only be made while a primary amendment is pending.

Let’s look at an example of a proper secondary amendment:

Main Motion: That five hundred dollars be donated to the Save the Parliamentarians fund.

Primary Amendment: To insert “annually on January 20th” after the word “donated”.

Secondary Amendment: To strike “January” and insert “March”.

Notice that the secondary amendment does NOT propose to modify the language of the pending main motion. It proposes to modify the language of the primary amendment.

Now, look at the following example, and decide whether each of the secondary amendments below is proper:

Main Motion: That five hundred dollars be donated to the Save the Parliamentarians fund.

Primary Amendment: To strike “five hundred dollars be donated” and insert “members be encouraged to donate”

How many of the following are examples of a proper secondary amendment?

a. To strike out “the Save the Parliamentarians fund” and insert “reputable organizations concerned with preserving the well being of parliamentarians”

b. To strike “members be encouraged to donate”

c. To strike out “donate” and insert “contribute”

d. To strike out “members be encouraged to donate” and insert “an advertisement be purchased in the newspaper to bring attention”


PARLIAMENTARy MyThSThe Myth of the Silent Parliament

There is a common myth that the parliamentarian has a duty to remain unseen and unheard. A parliamentarian serving an organization will discover that there is a greater duty to provide clarity and instill a sense of confidence in the rules and the procedure, by directly addressing the assembly upon occasion for the purpose of shedding light on the parliamentary situation at hand.

This is done only with the permission of the presiding officer and the consent of the assembly. And it is often a very welcome service, since it allows the chair to completely remove the appearance of doubt, and it allows the chair to stay out of the hot seat. Whenever a confusing parliamentary situation arises, the chair can simply say, “The chair will have the parliamentarian explain the rules.”

This also creates a sense of trust on the part of the assembly, not just a trust in the competency of the parliamentarian, but also a trust in the fairness of the rules.

It is important to remember that we must provide a service to our clients, and we have a duty to assist those clients with the application of the rules.

Your modest editor has received heartfelt congratulations and even standing ovations from grateful members of organizations, not for remaining unheard, but for addressing the assembly to explain the nuances of procedure, turning chaos into order.


IN MEMORy

Portia Shirley Mathews Chapman died unexpectedly from a stroke on Friday, November 22, 2013, in Lone Tree, Colorado at the age of 83.

Shirley was born on June 23, 1930 in Toronto, Canada. She was the great-granddaughter of Brigadier General Henry Martyn Robert, author of Robert’s Rules of Order.

Shirley was an accomplished parliamentarian and a Professional Registered Parliamentarian of the National Association of Parliamentarians. She was active in several units, including the Professional Parliamentary Research Unit, and held the offices of vice-president and treasurer of the Colorado Association of Parliamentarians, as well as being active on committees. Shirley often wrote bylaws, was a convention parliamentarian, wrote and published articles and skits, and made speeches about General Henry Robert. Most of all Shirley enjoyed consulting and unraveling esoteric parliamentary problems.

Shirley dedicated herself to her family and to her love of Parliamentary Law.

Portia Shirley Mathews


2013-2015 District Directors Back row: Daniel Ivey-Soto, Denise Irminger, Joyce Brown-Watkins, John Hohlbauch Front row: Bill Starkey, Alice Bartelt, Nancy Dauster, Darlene Allen

Executive Director Mike Chamberlain

2013-2015 NAP Executive BoardBack row: Mike Chamberlain, James N. Jones, Steve Glanstein, Jim Stewart, Daniel Ivey-SotoFront row: Evan Lemoine, Mary Randolph, Ann Guiberson, Ann Rempel


2013-2015 District Directors Back row: Daniel Ivey-Soto, Denise Irminger, Joyce Brown-Watkins, John Hohlbauch Front row: Bill Starkey, Alice Bartelt, Nancy Dauster, Darlene Allen

President Ann Guiberson, with her husband Ron

NAP Educational Foundation President Sandy Olson


Answer keyQuick Quiz

aNSwer 1d. None; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 54, ll. 13-29

aNSwer 2I. A member makes the motion.II. Another member seconds the motion.III. The chair states the motion (e.g. It is moved

and seconded to recess for five minutes).

aNSwer 3I. Members debate the motion.II. The chair puts the question to a vote.III. The chair announces the result of the vote.

motioN SPotliGht: Secondary AmendmentBoth c and d are examples of proper secondary amendments.

myStery motioN

Mystery Motion 1: Amend; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 130

Mystery Motion 2: Recess; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 230

Mystery Motion 3: Lay on the Table; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 215, l. 10 & tinted page 4

Mystery Motion 4: Limit or Extend Limits of Debate; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 191, ll. 19-27

Mystery Motion 5: A motion to approve the minutes; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 354, ll. 23-24 & p. 355, ll. 5-6.

Mystery Motion 6: Reconsider; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 315, ll. 28-34

Mystery Motion 7: Suspend the Rules; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 260, ll. 19-26

Mystery Motion 8: Fix the Time to Which to Adjourn; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 242, ll. 20-24

Mystery Motion 9: Appeal; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 398, ll. 18-33

Mystery Motion 10: Postpone Indefinitely; see RONR (11th ed.), p. 127, ll. 17-25 & tinted page 46

Questions & Answers

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 RONR (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 Josh Martin, PRP, 1434 Grand Ave, Apt 9, St. Paul, MN 55105, or e-mailed to [email protected].

Q&A 1Cannon Find Eligible Member for Critical Office

Q My chapter in a national organization has a bylaw that

fills a vacancy by special election within 30 days of the vacancy. We have two critical vacancies that no qualified member wants to take. What can the president do to resolve the problem? The offices cannot remain vacant based upon

the national organization’s bylaws. In this case can the local president appoint members that may not have all the qualifications for the position or will the chapter be in noncompliance with the national organization and thus be suspended from operations? Please advise.

A The president cannot appoint members who are not quali-

fied, unless there is some clause in the bylaws which would allow for that in this situation. Rules in the bylaws cannot be suspended unless


parliamentary research team

Josh Martin, PRPParliamentary Research Editor

Ann Homer, PRPAssistant Research Editor

Ronald Stinson, PRPNAP Past President Consultant

Leonard Young, PRPNAP Parliamentarian

the rule provides for its own suspen-sion or if the rule is in the nature of a rule of order, which this is not. See RONR (11th ed), p. 263, ll. 1-7.

Unless the bylaws provide otherwise, the only options to fill the vacancy are to find someone who is qualified or to change the qualifications for the position by amending the bylaws. It’s not possible to give a general answer about what would happen if the president violated the bylaws in this instance, since that will depend heavily on the bylaws of the chapter and the national organization.

Q& A 2Electing a Slate of Officers

Q Our bylaws require a ballot vote to elect officers. Is it in

order to make a motion to elect a slate of officers, so long as the motion is voted on by ballot?

A It depends on what you mean by electing a slate of officers.

If the goal is to elect a group of officers by a single up-or-down vote, no, the motion is not in order. The purpose of a requirement for a ballot vote for an election, unless the bylaws suggest otherwise, is not only to provide secrecy, but to grant members the right to vote for any eligible candidate, including “write-

in” votes for candidates who have not been nominated. See RONR (11th ed), p. 439, ll. 22-23; p. 441, l. 25 – p. 442, l. 2. There is also the fact that voting “for” or “against” candidates in an election is not proper. The way to vote against a candidate is to vote for someone else. See RONR (11th ed), p. 414, ll. 1-5.

If the bylaws did not require a ballot vote, the motion would be in order, but it would require unanimous consent for adoption. When a motion contains a series of motions dealing with different subjects, such as separate offices, a single member may demand a separate vote on one or more of the motions in the series. See RONR (11th ed), p. 274-275.

On the other hand, if the goal is simply to list multiple offices on the same ballot, while permitting members to still cast a separate vote for each office, the motion is in order. See RONR (11th ed), p. 413, ll. 21-23.

Q & A 3 Presentation During Debate

Q At a city council meeting—there are fewer than 12

members—one member makes PowerPoint presentations during debate. Is it in order for a member to give a PowerPoint presentation


Questions and Answers (continued from previous page)

during debate? It should be noted that the presentation takes up much debate time.

Also, during meetings there is a wide disparity of participation among members. Is there some action the chair could take to encourage participation?

A Assuming that any Power-Point, Keynote, or similar pre-

sentation during debate is germane to the pending question—RONR (11th ed.), p. 392, ll. 5-10—one must ask, “Is such a presentation in the nature of reading a paper?” If so, then permission of the assembly—in this case, the city council—is re-quired: “If any member objects, a member has no right to read from … any paper or book as part of his speech, without permission of the assembly.” See RONR (11th ed.), p. 393, ll. 30-33.

However, it might be the custom of this city council to assume permission to read papers unless there’s a specific objection to do so. This assumption, though, is based on the fact that whatever is read is done “only in debate on a pending question.” See RONR (11th ed.), p. 298, fn.

Remember, also, that in small boards, such as this city council, there is no limit to the number of speeches during debate unless the council itself chooses to impose such limits. See RONR (11th ed.), p.

488, first fn. If such a presentation as described above is allowed, it is up to the chair to see to it that the presentation does not negatively affect debate or interfere with the assembly’s business. See RONR (11th ed.), p. 450, ll. 9-13.

The chair, of course, cannot force anyone to participate in debate, but he or she may make certain that everyone who wishes to speak on a question has the chance do so. For example, the chair might ask specifically if “council member Jane Doe wishes to speak on the question” before recognizing a person who already has spoken, even though there might be no limits on debate.

Q & A 4Appropriate Use of a Point of Order

Q When can a “Point of Order” be used? Can it only be used

when there is a motion on the floor or at other times? How many times can it be used?

A A point of order can be raised at any time regarding

a breach of the rules, although in most cases it must be raised promptly. See RONR (11th ed), p. 250, ll. 19-20. It may be raised when another member has the floor, even interrupting a member if the point



requires immediate attention. See RONR (11th ed), p. 249, ll. 13-16. There are occasions when a point of order would be appropriate when no motion is pending, such as a point of order regarding a motion that has just been made, or regarding indecorous language in a report.

There is no limit on the number of times a member may raise a legitimate point of order, although members should generally avoid making points of order on minor technicalities and focus on errors which would infringe on members’ rights or disrupt the proper transaction of business. See RONR (11th ed), p. 250, ll. 11-15. Additionally, if the chair is certain that a member is repeatedly raising points of order in order to obstruct business, he should rule them out of order or refuse to recognize the member. See RONR (11th ed), p. 342, l. 35 – p. 343, l. 3.

Q&A 5E-Mail Voting

Q Please provide the best accepted method/process for

e-mail voting. Although not stated in the bylaws, the body agreed to use this method one time to complete a revision to the bylaws.

A RONR does not contain recommendations for a vote by

e-mail. The recommended practices for votes by mail are discussed in RONR (11th ed), p. 424-425, and these could be used as a starting point for developing similar rules for a vote by e-mail.

If the organization’s bylaws do not authorize e-mail voting, then it cannot be used. Voting by e-mail violates the fundamental principle of parliamentary law that the vote is limited to members who are actually present at the time of the vote. See RONR (11th ed), p. 423, ll. 17-25. This rule cannot be suspended, and any action taken in violation of this rule is null and void. See RONR (11th ed), p. 263, ll. 15-24; p. 251, ll. 3-26.

Parliamentary Law Month ProclamationApril 2014

whereaS, since April is the birth month of Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the first American manual of parliamentary procedure in 1801, it is an appropriate time to honor him and celebrate the use of parliamentary procedure;

whereaS, it is fitting to honor Henry Martyn Robert, author of Pocket Manual of Rules of Order for Deliberative Assemblies, also known as Robert’s Rules of Order;

whereaS, Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised is the most widely recognized and used parliamentary authority in public and private organizations;

whereaS, it is timely to reflect upon the importance of parlia-mentary procedure in providing for civil discourse, protecting individual rights, ensuring fairness, and in maintaining order in meetings;

whereaS, The National Association of Parliamentarians® has, by adoption of a standing rule, designated the month of April as Parliamentary Law Month;

whereaS, the National Association of Parliamentarians® is a professional society dedicated to educating leaders throughout the world in effective meeting management through the use of parliamentary procedure; and

whereaS, the vision of the National Association of Parliamentar-ians® is to provide parliamentary leadership to the world; now, therefore, be it

reSolVeD, That I, Ann Guiberson, PRP, President of the National Association of Parliamentarians®, do hereby declare April 2014 as Parliamentary Law Month and call upon the districts, associations, units, and all members to observe the month with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities as a way to carry out our mission and bring our vision into reality.

Q: Why are none of these parliamentarians eating?

(Clockwise from far left) Gwen Brown Karen Herbert Joyce Henderson Ann Guiberson Ron Guiberson Barbara Rosi Ann Rempel Mary Randolph LaVonne Ellis

(Clockwise from far left) Rosalie Stroman Gretchen Denton Virginia Berberick Denise Irminger Darlene Allen Becky Rutz Greg Goodwiller Virginia Harris Maurice S. Henderson

(Clockwise from far left) Mike Chamberlain Evan Lemoine Donna Thompson Kathy Boyer Carrie Dickson Beulah Sutherland Jim Slaughter

A: Probably because they’re under the impression that some interrupting business must be disposed of before it is in order to “take from the table” what has been

“laid on the table.” [See RONR (11th ed.), p. 213, ll. 6-8 & p. 301, ll. 8-11]

national parliamentarian (vol. 75 no. 1)

Documents

growing nap

nap headquarters

ann rempel

parliamentary leadership

parliamentary language

jim jones

president maurice

prpmike chamberlain