The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About103-Rosenbergs.pdfLeague of California Cities 1 Rosenberg’s Rules of Order: Simple Parliamentary Procedures for the 21 st Century About the League of California Cities Established in 1898, the League of California Cities is a mem- ber organization that represents California’s incorporated cities. The League strives to protect the local authority and autonomy of city government and help California’s cities effectively serve their residents. In addition to advocating on cities’ behalf at the state capitol, the League provides its members with professional development programs and information resources, conducts educational conferences and research, and publishes Western City magazine. About Western City Magazine Western City is the League of California Cities' monthly maga- zine. Western City provides lively, interdisciplinary analyses of issues affecting local governance. Its goal is to offer immediately practical ideas, information and bigger-picture policy issues and trends. For more information, visit www.westerncity.com. “Rosenberg’s Rules of Order” ﬁrst appeared in Western City magazine in August and September 2003. VISION: To be recognized and respected as the leading advocate for the common interests of California cities. MISSION: To restore and protect local control for cities through education and advocacy to enhance the quality of life for all Californians. About the Author Dave Rosenberg is an elected county supervisor representing the 4th District in Yolo County. He also serves as director of community and intergovernmental relations, director of opera- tions, and senior advisor to the governor of California. He has served as a member and chair of numerous state and local boards, both appointed and elected, and also served on the Davis City Council for 12 years, including two terms as mayor. He has taught classes on parliamentary procedure and has served as parliamentarian for large and small governing bodies. In the fall of 2003, Gov. Davis appointed Rosenberg as a judge of the Yolo County Superior Court. 1400 K Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 658-8200 Fax (916) 658-8240 www.cacities.org To order additional copies of this publication,call (916) 658-8257 or visit www.cacities.org/store. ©2003 League of California Cities.All rights reserved. www.cacities.org 1 he rules of procedure at meetings should be simple enough for most people to understand. Unfortunately, that hasn’t always been the case. Virtu- ally all clubs, associations, boards, coun- cils and bodies follow a set of rules, Robert’s Rules of Order, which are em- bodied in a small but complex book. Virtually no one I know has actually read this book cover to cover. Worse yet, the book was written for another time and purpose. If you are running the British Parliament, Robert’s Rules of Order is a dandy and quite use- ful handbook. On the other hand, if you’re running a meeting of a ﬁve- member body with a few members of the public in attendance, a simpliﬁed version of the rules of parliamentary procedure is in order. Hence, the birth of “Rosenberg’s Rules of Order.” This publication covers the rules of parliamentary procedure based on my 20 years of experience chairing meetings in state and local government. These rules have been simpliﬁed and slimmed down for 21st century meetings, yet they retain the basic tenets of order to which we are accustomed. “Rosenberg’s Rules of Order” are sup- ported by the following four principles: 1.Rules should establish order.The ﬁrst purpose of the rules of parlia- mentary procedure is to establish a framework for the orderly conduct of meetings. 2.Rules should be clear.Simple rules lead to wider understanding and participation. Complex rules create two classes: those who understand and participate and those who do not fully understand and do not fully participate. 3.Rules should be user-friendly.That is, the rules must be simple enough that citizens feel they have been able to participate in the process. 4.Rules should enforce the will of the majority while protecting the rights of the minority.The ultimate purpose of the rules of procedure is to encourage discussion and to facili- tate decision-making by the body. In a democracy, the majority rules. The rules must enable the majority to express itself and fashion a result, while permitting the minority to also express itself (but not dominate) and fully participate in the process. The Chairperson Should Take a Back Seat During Discussions While all members of the governing body should know and understand the rules of parliamentary procedure, it is the chairperson (chair) who is charged with applying the rules of conduct. The chair should be well versed in those rules, because the chair, for all intents and purposes, makes the ﬁnal ruling on the rules. In fact, all decisions by the chair are ﬁnal unless overruled by the governing body itself. Because the chair conducts the meeting, it is common courtesy for the chair to take a less active role than other mem- bers of the body in debates and discus- sions. This does not mean that the chair should not participate in the debate or discussion. On the contrary, as a mem- ber of the body, the chair has full rights to participate in debates, discussions and decision-making. The chair should, however, strive to be the last to speak at the discussion and debate stage, and should not make or second a motion unless he or she is convinced that no other member of the body will do so. The Basic Format for an Agenda Item Discussion Formal meetings normally have a written, published agenda; informal meetings may have only an oral or understood agenda. In either case, the meeting is governed by the agenda and the agenda constitutes the body’s agreed-upon road map for the meeting. And each agenda item can be handled by the chair in the following basic format. First,the chair should clearly announce the agenda item number and should clearly state what the subject is. The chair should then announce the format that will be followed. Second,following that agenda format, the chair should invite the appropriate people to report on the item, including any recommendation they might have. The appropriate person may be the chair, a member of the governing body, Rosenberg’s Rules of Order: Simple Parliamentary Procedures for the 21 st Century There are exceptions to the general rule of free and open debate on motions. The exceptions all apply when there is a desire to move on. by Dave Rosenberg League of California Cities2 a staff person, or a committee chair charged with providing information about the agenda item. Third,the chair should ask members of the body if they have any technical questions for clariﬁcation. At this point, members of the governing body may ask clarifying questions to the people who reported on the item, and they should be given time to respond. Fourth,the chair should invite public comments or, if appropriate at a formal meeting, open the meeting to public input. If numerous members of the pub- lic indicate a desire to speak to the sub- ject, the chair may limit the time of each public speaker. At the conclusion of the public comments, the chair should ann- ounce that public input has concluded (or that the public hearing, as the case may be, is closed). Fifth,the chair should invite a motion from the governing body members. The chair should announce the name of the member who makes the motion. Sixth,the chair should determine if any member of the body wishes to second the motion. The chair should announce the name of the member who seconds the motion. It is normally good practice for a motion to require a second before proceeding with it, to ensure that it is not just one member of the body who is interested in a particular approach. However, a second is not an absolute requirement, and the chair can proceed with consideration and a vote on the motion even when there is no second. This is a matter left to the discretion of the chair. Seventh,if the motion is made and sec- onded, the chair should make sure every- one understands the motion. This is done in one of three ways: 1.The chair can ask the maker of the motion to repeat it; 2.The chair can repeat the motion; or 3.The chair can ask the secretary or the clerk of the body to repeat the motion. Motions are made in a simple two-step process. First, the chair recognizes the member. Second, the member makes a motion by preceding the member’s desired approach with the words: “I move …”A typical motion might be: “I move that we give 10 days’ notice in the future for all our meetings.” The chair usually initiates the motion by: 1.Inviting the members to make a motion: “A motion at this time would be in order.” Rosenberg’s Rules of Order: Simple Parliamentary Procedure for the 21st Century Ninth,the chair takes a vote. Simply asking for the “ayes” and then the “nays” is normally sufﬁcient. If members of the body do not vote, then they “abstain.” Unless the rules of the body provide otherwise or unless a super-majority is required (as delineated later in these rules), a simple majority determines whether the motion passes or is defeated. Tenth,the chair should announce the result of the vote and should announce what action (if any) the body has taken. In announcing the result, the chair should indicate the names of the mem- bers, if any, who voted in the minority on the motion. This announcement might take the following form: “The motion passes by a vote of 3-2, with Smith and Jones dissenting. We have passed the motion requiring 10 days’ notice for all future meetings of this governing body.” Motions in General Motions are the vehicles for decision- making. It is usually best to have a mot- ion before the governing body prior to discussing an agenda item, to help every- one focus on the motion before them. Eighth,the chair should now invite dis- cussion of the motion by the members of the governing body. If there is no desired discussion or the discussion has ended, the chair should announce that the body will vote on the motion. If there has been no discussion or a very brief discussion, the vote should proceed immediately, and there is no need to re- peat the motion. If there has been sub- stantial discussion, it is normally best to make sure everyone understands the motion by repeating it. 2.Suggesting a motion to the members: “A motion would be in order that we give 10-days’ notice in the future for all our meetings.” 3.Making the motion. As noted, the chair has every right as a member of the body to make a motion, but normally should do so only if he or she wishes a motion to be made but no other member seems willing to do so. The Three Basic Motions Three motions are the most common: 1.The basic motion.The basic motion is the one that puts forward a deci- sion for consideration. A basic mot- ion might be: “I move that we create a ﬁve-member committee to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.” 2.The motion to amend.If a member wants to change a basic motion that is under discussion, he or she would move to amend it. A motion to amend might be: “I move that we amend the motion to have a 10- member committee.” A motion to amend takes the basic motion that is before the body and seeks to change it in some way. Debate on policy is healthy; debate on personalities is not. The chair has the right to cut off discussion that is too personal, too loud or too crude. www.cacities.org 3 Rosenberg’s Rules of Order: Simple Parliamentary Procedure for the 21st Century 3.The substitute motion.If a member wants to completely do away with the basic motion under discussion and put a new motion before the governing body, he or she would “m ove a substitute motion.” A substi- tute motion might be: “I move a sub- stitute motion that we cancel the annual fundraiser this year.” Motions to amend and substitute mo- tions are often confused. But they are quite different, and so is their effect, if passed. A motion to amend seeks to retain the basic motion on the ﬂoor, but to modify it in some way. A substitute motion seeks to throw out the basic motion on the ﬂoor and substi- tute a new and different motion for it. The decision as to whether a motion is really a motion to amend or a substitute motion is left to the chair. So that if a member makes what that member calls a motion to amend, but the chair deter- mines it is really a substitute motion, the chair’s designation governs. When Multiple Motions Are Before The Governing Body Up to three motions may be on the ﬂoor simultaneously. The chair may reject a fourth motion until the three that are on the ﬂoor have been resolved. When two or three motions are on the ﬂoor (after motions and seconds) at the same time, the ﬁrst vote should be on the last motion made. So, for exam- ple, assume the ﬁrst motion is a basic “motion to have a ﬁve-member commit- tee to plan and put on our annual fund- raiser.” During the discussion of this motion, a member might make a second motion to “amend the main motion to have a 10-member committee, not a ﬁve-member committee, to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.” And per- haps, during that discussion, a member makes yet a third motion as a “substitute motion that we not have an annual fundraiser this year.” The proper proce- dure would be as follows. First, the chair would deal with the third (the last) motion on the ﬂoor, the substitute motion. After discussion and debate, a vote would be taken ﬁrst on the third motion. If the substitute motion passes, it would be a substitute for the basic motion and would elimi- nate it. The ﬁrst motion would be moot, as would the second motion (which sought to amend the ﬁrst motion), and the action on the agenda item would be complete. No vote would be taken on the ﬁrst or second motions. On the other hand, if the substitute motion (the third motion) failed, the chair would proceed to consideration of the second (now the last) motion on the ﬂoor, the motion to amend. If the substitute motion failed, the chair would then deal with the second (now the last) motion on the ﬂoor, the motion to amend. The discussion and debate would focus strictly on the amendment (should the committee be ﬁve or10 members). If the motion to amend passed, the chair would now move to consider the main motion (the ﬁrst motion) as amended. If the motion to amend failed, the chair would now move to consider the main motion (the ﬁrst motion) in its original format, not amended. To Debate or Not to Debate The basic rule of motions is that they are subject to discussion and debate. Accordingly, basic motions, motions to amend, and substitute motions are all eligible, each in their turn, for full dis- cussion before and by the body. The debate can continue as long as members of the body wish to discuss an item, sub- ject to the decision of the chair that it is time to move on and take action. There are exceptions to the general rule of free and open debate on motions. The exceptions all apply when there is a desire of the body to move on. The fol- lowing motions are not debatable (that is, when the following motions are made and seconded, the chair must immedi- ately call for a vote of the body without debate on the motion): A motion to adjourn.This motion, if passed, requires the body to immediately adjourn to its next regularly scheduled meeting. This motion requires a simple majority vote. A motion to recess.This motion, if passed, requires the body to immediately take a recess. Normally, the chair deter- mines the length of the recess, which may range from a few minutes to an hour. It requires a simple majority vote. The challenge for anyone chairing a public meet- ing is to accommodate public input in a timely and time-sensitive way, while maintaining steady progress through the agenda items. Third, the chair would now deal with the ﬁrst motion that was placed on the ﬂoor. The original motion would either be in its original format (ﬁve-member committee) or, if amended, would be in its amended format (10-member com- mittee). And the question on the ﬂoor for discussion and decision would be whether a committee should plan and put on the annual fundraiser. A motion to ﬁx the time to adjourn. This motion, if passed, requires the body to adjourn the meeting at the speciﬁc time set in the motion. For example, the motion might be: “I move we adjourn this meeting at midnight.” It requires a simple majority vote. A motion to table.This motion, if passed, requires discussion of the agenda item to be halted and the agenda item to League of California Cities4 be placed on “hold.” The motion may contain a speciﬁc time in which the item can come back to the body: “I move we table this item until our regu- lar meeting in October.” Or the motion may contain no speciﬁc time for the return of the item, in which case a motion to take the item off the table and bring it back to the body will have to be taken at a future meeting. A motion to table an item (or to bring it back to the body) requires a simple majority vote. A motion to limit debate.The most common form of this motion is to say: “I move the previous question” or “I move the question” or “I call for the question.” When a member of the body makes such a motion, the member is really saying: “I’ve had enough debate. Let’s get on with the vote.” When such a motion is made, the chair should ask for a second to the motion, stop debate, and vote on the motion to limit debate. The motion to limit debate requires a two-thirds vote of the body. Note that a motion to limit debate could include a time limit. For example: “I move we limit debate on this agenda item to 15 minutes.” Even in this format, the the motion fails. If one member is ab- sent and the vote is 3-3, the motion still fails. All motions require a simple majority, but there are a few exceptions. The exceptions occur when the body is taking an action that effectively cuts off the ability of a minority of the body to take an action or discuss an item. These extraordinary motions require a two-thirds majority (a super-majority) to pass: Motion to limit debate.Whether a member says, “I move the previous question,” “I move the question,” “I call for the question” or “I move to limit debate,” it all amounts to an attempt to cut off the ability of the minority to dis- cuss an item, and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass. Motion to close nominations.When choosing ofﬁcers of the body, such as the chair, nominations are in order either from a nominating committee or from the ﬂoor of the body. A motion to close nominations effectively cuts off the right of the minority to nominate ofﬁcers, and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass. pend the rules for a particular purpose. For example, the body (a private club) might have a rule prohibiting the atten- dance at meetings by non-club mem- bers. A motion to suspend the rules would be in order to allow a non-club member to attend a meeting of the club on a particular date or on a particular agenda item. The Motion to Reconsider There is a special and unique motion that requires a bit of explanation all by itself: the motion to reconsider. A tenet of parliamentary procedure is ﬁnality. After vigorous discussion, debate and a vote, there must be some closure to the issue. And so, after a vote is taken, the matter is deemed closed, subject only to reopening if a proper motion to reconsider is made. A motion to reconsider requires a majority vote to pass, but there are two special rules that apply only to the motion to reconsider. First is the matter of timing. A motion to reconsider must be made at the meet- ing where the item was ﬁrst voted upon or at the very next meeting of the body. A motion to reconsider made at a later time is untimely. (The body, however, can always vote to suspend the rules and, by a two-thirds majority, allow a motion to reconsider to be made at another time.) Second, a motion to reconsider may be made only by certain members of the body. Accordingly, a motion to recon- sider may be made only by a member who voted in the majority on the origi- nal motion. If such a member has a change of heart, he or she may make the motion to reconsider (any other mem- ber of the body may second the motion). If a member who voted in the minority seeks to make the motion to reconsider, it must be ruled out of order. The pur- pose of this rule is ﬁnality. If a member of the minority could make a motion to reconsider, then the item could be brought back to the body again and again, which would defeat the purpose of ﬁnality. Rosenberg’s Rules of Order: Simple Parliamentary Procedure for the 21st Century motion to limit debate requires a two- thirds vote of the body. A similar mot- ion is a motion to object to consideration of an item.This motion is not debatable, and if passed, precludes the body from even considering an item on the agenda. It also requires a two-thirds vote. Majority and Super-Majority Votes In a democracy, decisions are made with a simple majority vote. A tie vote means the motion fails. So in a seven-member body, a vote of 4-3 passes the motion. A vote of 3-3 with one abstention means Motion to object to the consideration of a question.Normally, such a motion is unnecessary, because the objectionable item can be tabled or defeated straight up. However, when members of a body do not even want an item on the agenda to be considered, then such a motion is in order. It is not debatable, and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass. Motion to suspend the rules.This motion is debatable, but requires a two- thirds vote to pass. If the body has its own rules of order, conduct or proce- dure, this motion allows the body to sus- If you are running the British Parliament, Robert’s Rules of Order is a dandy and quite useful handbook. www.cacities.org 5 If the motion to reconsider passes, then the original matter is back before the body, and a new original motion is in order. The matter may be discussed and debated as if it were on the ﬂoor for the ﬁrst time. Courtesy and Decorum The rules of order are meant to create an atmosphere where the members of the body and the members of the public can attend to business efﬁciently, fairly and with full participation. And at the same time, it is up to the chair and the members of the body to maintain com- mon courtesy and decorum. Unless the setting is very informal, it is always best for only one person at a time to have the ﬂoor, and it is always best for every lege relate to anything that would inter- fere with the normal comfort of the meeting. For example, the room may be too hot or too cold, or a blowing fan might interfere with a person’s ability to hear. Order.The proper interruption would be: “Point of order.” Again, the chair would ask the interrupter to “state your point.” Appropriate points of order Withdraw a motion.During debate and discussion of a motion, the maker of the motion on the ﬂoor, at any time, may interrupt a speaker to withdraw his or her motion from the ﬂoor. The motion is immediately deemed with- drawn, although the chair may ask the person who seconded the motion if he or she wishes to make the motion, and any other member may make the motion if properly recognized. Special Notes About Public Input The rules outlined here help make meet- ings very public-friendly. But in addi- tion, and particularly for the chair, it is wise to remember three special rules that apply to each agenda item: Rule One:Tell the public what the body will be doing. Rule Two:Keep the public informed while the body is doing it. Rule Three:When the body has acted, tell the public what the body did. Public input is essential to a healthy democracy, and community participa- tion in public meetings is an important element of that input. The challenge for anyone chairing a public meeting is to accommodate public input in a timely and time-sensitive way, while maintain- ing steady progress through the agenda items. The rules presented here for con- ducting a meeting are offered as tools for effective leadership and as a means of developing sound public policy. ■ Rosenberg’s Rules of Order: Simple Parliamentary Procedure for the 21st Century It is usually best to have a motion before the gov- erning body prior to discussing an agenda item, to help everyone focus. Motions to amend and substitute motions are often confused. But they are quite different, and so is their effect, if passed. speaker to be ﬁrst recognized by the chair before proceeding to speak. The chair should always ensure that debate and discussion of an agenda item focus on the item and the policy in ques- tion, not on the personalities of the members of the body. Debate on policy is healthy; debate on personalities is not. The chair has the right to cut off discus- sion that is too personal, too loud or too crude. Debate and discussion should be fo- cused, but free and open. In the interest of time, the chair may, however, limit the time allotted to speakers, including members of the body. Can a member of the body interrupt the speaker? The general rule is no. There are, however, exceptions. A speaker may be interrupt- ed for the following reasons: Privilege.The proper interruption would be: “Point of privilege.” The chair would then ask the interrupter to “state your point.” Appropriate points of privi- relate to anything that would not be considered appropriate conduct of the meeting; for example, if the chair moved on to a vote on a motion that permits debate without allowing that discussion or debate. Appeal.If the chair makes a ruling that a member of the body disagrees with, that member may appeal the ruling of the chair. If the motion is seconded and after debate, if it passes by a simple majority vote, then the ruling of the chair is deemed reversed. Call for orders of the day.This is sim- ply another way of saying, “Let’s return to the agenda.” If a member believes that the body has drifted from the agreed- upon agenda, such a call may be made. It does not require a vote, and when the chair discovers that the agenda has not been followed, the chair simply reminds the body to return to the agenda item properly before them. If the chair fails to do so, the chair’s determination may be appealed. League of California Cities8 1400 K Street Sacramento,CA 95814 (916) 658-8200 Fax (916) 658-8240 www.cacities.org SKU 1533 $5.00 To order additional copies of this publication,call (916) 658-8257 or visit www.cacities.org/store. ©2003 League of California Cities. All rights reserved. This publication is printed on recycled paper