National Parliamentarian (Vol. 78, No. 4)

NP

National Parliamentarian Volume 78, No. 4 | Summer 2017

Expand your Horizon

Biennial Convention NAP 41st Convention Preview

Pages 23-36

Parliamentary Resources at Your Fingertips There is only one place to turn for your parliamentary resources: NAP. Browse our online store for • Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised and In Brief – we offer spiral-bound versions not available anywhere else!

• Parliamentary reference cards • Basic information handouts • Script samples • Leadership primers for officers • Credentialing study guides • Teaching resources • And so much more

Check us out today at

www.parliamentarians.org

NP

National Parliamentarian Volume 78, No. 4 | Summer 2017

Contents 2015-2017 NAP Officers President Mary L. Randolph, PRP

From the Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 President’s Message NAP R.I.S.E.S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Vice-President James N. Jones, PRP

FEATURES Reaching Youth for Your Unit – Coordinate With Scouting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Secretary Teresa Stone, PRP

What is the Commission on Credentialing and Why Should We Care? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Treasurer Wanda M. Sims, PRP Directors-at-Large Darlene Allen, PRP Ann Rempel, PRP Alison Wallis, PRP District Director Representatives Kevin Connelly, PRP Joyce Brown-Watkins, PRP

Methods of Nominating with a Focus on the Nominating Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 The Whole Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Take a Breath of Fresh Air in the Windy City . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Nominee for Office – Ann Rempel, PRP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 SPECIAL SECTION 41st Biennial Convention • Convention Preview . . . . . . . . 23 Departments Test Yourself

Parliamentarian Roger Hanshaw, PRP

Baker’s Dozen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Executive Director Cynthia Launchbaugh

Questions & Answers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

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

Another Baker’s Dozen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Answer Key . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 NAP Connections In Memoriam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 New Registered Parliamentarians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Join the conversation!

Find us on facebook. www.facebook.com/parliamentarians www.parliamentarians.org

1

National Parliamentarian

®

Official publication of the National Association of Parliamentarians® 213 S. Main Street • Independence, MO 64050-3808 816.833.3892 • 888.627.2929 hq@nap2.org • www.parliamentarians.org

NP Submission Guidelines National 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 in Microsoft Word or rich text format and transmitted via email. Illustrations, photographic prints and high-resolution photos are welcome. Materials submitted will not be returned unless special arrangements are made in advance with the editor.

Contributors must include a completed “Assign and Transfer Copyright” form with their submission, granting NAP the copyright or permission to publish.

Submission Deadlines

Volume 79, No. 1 (Fall 2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . August 1, 2017 Volume 79, No. 2 (Winter 2018) . . . . . . . . . November 1, 2017 Volume 79, No. 3 (Spring 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . February 1, 2018

Editor

Martha Womack Haun, PhD, PRP mhaun@uh.edu

Assistant Editor Dana Dickson, RP

Parliamentary Research Committee Jonathan Jacobs, PRP Steve Britton, PRP George Mervosh, III, PRP Roger Hanshaw, PRP

Parliamentary Review Committee Betty Tunstall, PRP Dennis Clark, PRP Beverly Przybylski, PRP

NATIONAL PARLIAMENTARIAN®

(Registered U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, ISSN 8755-7592) Published quarterly by the National Association of Parliamentarians ©2017 All rights to reproduce or reprint any portion of this publication are reserved, except by written permission of the editor. Opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those endorsed by NAP.

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

Annual subscription: $30 • Single copy: $8 From the Editor

Here we are just a few weeks from national convention!

It’s been a fast and exciting two years. My huge thanks to the many people who have worked with me to produce these eight issues of the NP—the authors of heavy thought pieces and fun games and brain teasers, the edit committee, the opinions committee, the Board, my assistant editor Dana Dickson, RP. Special thanks President Mary Randolph, PRP, CPP for trusting me to handle such a task, to our awesome graphic artist Rosemary Holderby, and to Exec. Director Cyndy Launchbaugh who always had my back. This was truly a team effort and I’m grateful to count it among my big experiences in life! Thanks y’all!

Martha J. Haun, PhD, PRP 2

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

President’s Message

NAP R.I.S.E.S. The National Association of Parliamentarians Biennial Convention is rapidly approaching. Convention marks the close of another biennium, making this a good time to reflect on NAP’s accomplishments, as well as look forward to what we can achieve in the coming years.

This past term, the focus was on NAP’s stability and membership involvement. Very soon after my election, I spent time at headquarters familiarizing myself with the operational aspects of NAP. Like an old house—or organization— maintenance is often put off until it can no longer be ignored, and such was the case for NAP. NAP needed updating—and in some cases repair. I added to my term priorities financial status, inadequate equipment, the NAP Website, the PRP referral system, and the Website bookstore to name a few areas that needed immediate attention.

The current database, which is the nerve center of all NAP does, is insufficient to fully support NAP’s growing membership. Staff has made great inroads in this area, but in the long run, the system cannot manage our form of membership requirements, especially in processing the dues statements and tracking credentialing changes. The first steps have been taken to find a better association management system.

With an involved Board of Directors, spending options were prioritized to cover the basic needs at headquarters and realistically bring the budget back on a strong footing—or as Treasurer Sims put it, “to stop the bleeding.” The board made the commitment to reduce costs wherever possible. Those steps included providing more information, and resources electronically, reducing the budgets for the board of directors, district directors, NAP representatives, and holding meetings by teleconference or AdobeConnect instead of in person.

The only exception was adjustment for the Commission on Credentialing, which was established by the 2015 NAP Convention delegates, and required several in-person meetings. www.parliamentarians.org

3

These budget cuts meant NAP’s volunteers absorbed much of the expense to provide services to you and on your behalf.

We are grateful for their generosity and commitment but it is unrealistic to expect the NAP leadership to continue shouldering this considerable financial burden.

In a critical review of the financial situation of NAP, it became clear that the dues needed to be increased. As we all know, prices today are not the same as they were even a few years ago. The increasing cost of member services since 2009—the last time the dues were adjusted—could no longer be ignored.

In 2008, the convention body gave the board the authority in the bylaws (Article III, 3B) to increase the dues biennially based on the Consumer Price Index-Urban (CPI-U) upon approval of the sitting board. The boards after 2009, however, did not continue to implement that option, leaving the current board to make the hard decision and approve an increase across the membership of approximately 13%, rounded down, for each classification. The amount was again determined by the formula in the bylaws.

This is just one of the many ways in which NAP has moved forward this term. The following are a few additional highlights: • Membership has started to grow again, or at least halted the downward trend.

• A new on-line PRP referral system has been implemented.

• The online bookstore has been updated as far as the current software will allow.

• We are actively preparing for a new software system that will provide more reliable data and support for our members, associations, and units via the web.

• We created a new membership brochure that is available through the bookstore—for free.

• Several new electronic units have been chartered, which will be helpful to those members unable to participate in a unit, including our international members. These e-units are providing education as well as a sense of belonging for many of our members.

4

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

As president and a long-term active member, I hold to the basics of R.I.S.E.S. as a critical pillar of NAP. These are the keys that can make NAP the association that we all envision—the leader of parliamentary training to the world.

• Respect for our members and volunteers who have made NAP what it is today; • Integrity of NAP and the membership; • Service to and by members going the extra mile to help NAP or a client; • Education through teaching and sharing our expertise as a leader in parliamentary education; and • Stewardship of the whole association to improve the structure and finances of the association.

As we wrap up this biennium, the future of NAP is in your hands. You as a NAP member—represented by your state and unit delegates to the convention in September—will determine the next leadership team and direction of the association and thereby the future of NAP. Come to Chicago and make your voice heard.

Thank you for your support in continuing to grow a vital and dynamic NAP, and for the honor of allowing me to serve as your president.

Mary Randolph, PRP, NAP President

Correction from the Editor

Deep apologies are extended to Eli Merchant, PRP for an error in the spring issue of the NP. His article on The Dilatory Motion (p. 12) was mistakenly attributed to Dennis Clark, PRP. The editor is fully responsible for this error. www.parliamentarians.org

5

Reaching Youth for Your Unit – Coordinate With Scouting Paul D. McDonald – “The New Guy”

It’s no secret that NAP needs more youth members. Here’s a great idea for local parliamentary units to reach to over 2.7 million youth and nearly a million more adults at the same time: offer a workshop and instruction for the Public Speaking merit badge for the Boy Scouts of America.

There are five simple requirements to this merit badge and they can be achieved in three sessions of one to two hours each for a group of about 15 to 20 scouts. However, you should feel free to use more time if you believe it is necessary. There is also some preparation involved. And you will make a significant contribution to the future of society.

Step 1: Get Ready Becoming a Merit Badge Counselor in the BSA requires a few steps. First, you should register with the BSA. Contact a local scout troop or council and ask to register as a “Merit Badge Counselor”—the dues of $24 per year are waived for adult merit badge counselors (it’s code 42 if you need it). You will need to complete the BSA online Youth Protection Training, 6

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

a program that covers expectations in working with youth.

Youth protection rules require two adults at all times, at least one that must be registered and has completed the Youth Protection Training. Many times a parent or two from the troop will volunteer to be in the room to meet this requirement. They’ll be a big help!

Purchase a copy of the Public Speaking merit badge pamphlet ($4.99 plus shipping at scoutstuff.org) and read through the pamphlet. Note on page 48 the reference to the National Association of Parliamentarians!

Prepare lessons accordingly.

And, of course—find a suitable location for the course and reserve it.

Be sure to bring your nation’s flag to the event if the room does not have one: Scouts and parliamentarians love flags!

Step 2: Announce the course Work with scoutmasters and troop committees in your area to announce the course and invite everyone.

Instruct all scouts to show up with the following: 1. A copy of the Public Speaking merit badge pamphlet, which they have read 2. Pencil and paper 3. A printout of the Public Speaking merit badge workbook, available for free at http://meritbadge.org/ wiki/index.php/Public_Speaking 4. One 3 to 5 minute talk that meets requirement #1 and another that meets requirement #2

earning their merit badge and learning about public speaking as well as getting a good introduction to Robert’s Rules of Order. See the sample program below.

Scouts will probably get the most out of the program if each session is held on a separate day of each week.

I have done this program in two days instead of three, and if you only have time for one session you can always require the scouts to show up with the speeches for requirement 2 and 4 already prepared.

Scouts who do not complete all the requirements receive a “partial completion” and can finish up remaining requirements at another date with you or another qualified merit badge counselor of their choice.

5. A merit badge “blue card” (they will know what this is and can get one from Sample Program: their Scoutmaster) 1. Session A 6. Be in uniform I have had good luck using a free Eventbrite.com invitation system to let scouts reserve their spot and tell their friends. Make two classes of free tickets: one for scouts, another for adults—this will help you plan. Search Eventbrite for examples!

Step 3: Hold the Course This is the easy part— with proper planning you can lead the scouts through the process to

a. b.

c. d.

e.

f.

A quick lesson on creating an introduction Each scout prepares their introduction and then gives their introduction to the class. (requirement 1) Tips on impromptu speaking Each scout presents an impromptu speech by drawing a topic out of a hat (requirement 3) Basic intro to Parliamentary Procedure (simple motions) HOMEWORK: prepare two speeches for session B

2. Session B a. Present a 3 to 5 minute talk (requirement 2) b. Present a 8 to 10 minute speech (requirement 4) c. Additional intro to Parliamentary Procedure 3. Session C a. Mock Meeting (requirement 5) b. Process paperwork Photo on page 6 courtesy of the Boy Scouts of America. www.parliamentarians.org

7

Step 4: Follow-up and Repeat Find out how many scouting units are in your area and follow up with those units. They probably don’t know it, but each unit has their own bylaws and possibly standing rules.

They probably DO know that they need help to run an effective meeting.

The adults who assist with these programs are dedicated to serving the youth and many would welcome the chance to attend a unit workshop or possibly even join your unit.

Many of the older youth will also find interest as they strengthen their leadership skills. Follow up with the adult unit committees to offer an ongoing program in public speaking for the youth in your area.

Other opportunities What about girls? Don’t worry, the Girl Scouts also have a similar program: the aMAZE Public Speaker.

Contact your local Girl Scout Council to help. And the BSA also has several co-educational programs.

Are you among our Canadian friends? Scouting Canada would be thrilled to have adult leaders such as you teach their youth stronger communication and leadership skills.

There are countless opportunities to reach to the youth of the land— this is one of them. If your unit does not take this step, I urge you to take another one and reach the youth to develop the leaders and communicators of tomorrow.

Requirements to the Public Speaking merit badge 1. Give a three to five minute introduction of yourself to an audience such as your troop, class at school, or some other group.

2. Prepare a three- to five-minute talk on a topic of your choice that incorporates body language and visual aids.

3. Give an impromptu talk of at least two minutes either as part of a group discussion or before your counselor. Use a subject selected by your counselor that is interesting to you but that is not known to you in advance and for which you do not have time to prepare.

4. Select a topic of interest to your audience. Collect and organize information about the topic and prepare an outline. Write an eight- to 10-minute speech, practice it, then deliver it in a conversational way.

5. Show you know parliamentary procedure by leading a discussion or meeting according to accepted rules of order, or by answering questions on the rules of order.

From the Public Speaking merit badge pamphlet, Boy Scouts of America, © 2013 (2016 printing), page 2.

ISBN: 978-0-8395-3373-3

Paul McDonald is a member of the Jacomo Unit of the National Association of Parliamentarians in Independence, Missouri and is also the Cubmaster of Pack 3097 in Overland Park, Kansas.

And yes, he earned the Public Speaking merit badge when he was a Boy Scout! Contact him at http://www.speakerpaul.com/ or paul@speakerpaul.com with any questions.

8

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

W ha t is th e

Commission on Credentialing and why should you care?

Some history At the NAP convention in 2015, the assembly passed a significant bylaw amendment that has had no direct effects yet, but should influence the future of NAP significantly.

Over the years, one of the most controversial issues facing our membership has been the creation and administration of our system for awarding parliamentary credentials.

This may be one of the most important things we do to serve the public. When members present themselves as “registered” or “professionally registered,” this is a signal to the public that our organization has given them an informal license that says that their clients can expect a certain level of expertise if they choose to hire those NAP members to provide parliamentary services.

Our current system is flawed.

Some of it is out of date. The process has regularly been revised in a piecemeal fashion as problems arise, and the committee in charge of its administration is reconstituted with each new administration. The Special Committee on Education and Credentialing that was created in 2013 and which wrote the Body

of Knowledge researched how this process could be fixed. The result was a bylaws amendment, adopted at the 2015 convention, which created an independent Commission with six members serving staggered three-year terms that would have complete control over a new credentialing process to be developed in accordance with the latest psychometric techniques. The Commission was charged with creating this new system and then implementing it. Until the Commission decided it was ready to do this, the existing system would continue.

What has been done during the first two years?

Here is a brief chronology of what the Commission on Credentialing has been working on during its existence to date. For more details, a copy of the report that was presented at the 2016 NTC is available on the NAP website. There will be two presentations at this year’s convention during which this information will be updated. A brief presentation will be given at the membership meeting, and there will be a workshop when the Commission will give more detailed information. www.parliamentarians.org

9

Commission on Credentialing continued First things first The Commission began meeting immediately after the 2015 convention, and started to get organized. Since the entire system was being re-evaluated, the members looked at what NAP was already doing well and what needed improvement.

The first concept that was addressed was the meaning of our credentials and whether the existing tests reflected this meaning. It was noted that when the RP and PRP designations were originally created, it was thought that the RP would not be serving clients, but that it was only the “professional” parliamentarian who would be doing this. Therefore to attain the RP status, members were only expected to demonstrate book knowledge about procedure, while candidates for the PRP status needed to show that they could use that information in a professional setting. The Commissioners agreed that this is not what was currently happening. RPs are definitely serving clients. So then, what is the proper difference between an RP and a PRP? The Commissioners decided that RPs should be skilled members who could handle all ordinary meetings and typical situations, but that when an organization faced complex or unusual situations, it was the PRP who should be able to handle these.

The Commissioners also recognized that some parliamentarians have developed highly specialized areas 10

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

of expertise that would make them unusually well suited for appointment to jobs that required these kinds of specialized skills. So the Commission decided to imagine a future credential of Expert Parliamentarian which would have a designation for a particular area of expertise. Examples of possible specialized designations as an expert included: teaching, and professional presiding, or bylaws.

But it was agreed that this designation would take a back seat to the current need to update the RP and PRP testing.

With these definitions completed, the Commission looked at how we currently test members who wish to have these credentials in light of what is known about modern psychometric techniques. The Commissioners agreed that they needed to be informed about the latest techniques, and with the generous assistance of the NAP Educational Foundation, they held a three day meeting that included training by an expert trainer from the Wisconsin Instructional Design System (WIDS) organization.

After this training, the Commission agreed that only performance-based training with clear objectives for the candidate would accomplish our goals.

Instead of telling the candidate, “Know everything in RONR, and be able to answer questions about it from your memory,” the new idea was, “We will tell you what skills you need to have, and exactly what information you need to have in your head. We

will also recognize that some things that parliamentarians do require the active use of reference materials like RONR. And we will test you appropriately by asking you to demonstrate those skills or knowledge.” Therefore, the Criteria for Credentialing document was created specifying exactly what candidates for RP and PRP should be able to do.

These are called “Competencies.” And then “Performance Expectations” that lead to achieving those Competencies were identified. The exact rules making up each Performance Expectation were assembled in a document that was provided in a first version at the 2016 NAP Training Conference and can still be seen on the NAP website. (It should be noted that the Commission has subsequently made some minor changes.)

The Current Year in Review The next step was to create the actual means of assessing whether a candidate for RP can meet the relevant Performance Expectations, (with the intent of doing the same thing for PRP candidates after the new system for the RP credential is implemented). The Commission agreed that it is important that candidates be given ample opportunity to learn, and their growth should follow small steps where each success leads to a later success. It was agreed that anyone who currently has a

credential as an RP or PRP would continue to be entitled to renew it using the existing process until the new system is implemented. (Details about the transition can be found in the Criteria for Credentialing preliminary edition presented at the 2016 NTC and posted on the NAP website.)

The new process will have three steps. Step One of the RP assessment will involve the testing of basic memorized rules as designated in the Performance Expectations. There will be an emphasis on their accurate application rather than just memorization of the rules. The Commission created eight Drafting Committees composed of volunteer PRPs who are writing questions for eight multiple choice tests to be given online to candidates for the RP. In addition, there will be one part of this testing where the ability of candidates to rapidly look up and apply rules in RONR will be assessed. The tests will have to be completed and passed in a predetermined order so that the candidates can see how their skill is developing. Each test will provide feedback with the exact page and line numbers from the Performance Expectations for any question that is not correctly answered, and candidates will be able to retake failed tests a designated number of times with mostly different questions. After the candidate has completed the eight www.parliamentarians.org

11

Commission on Credentialing continued tests of information that need to be memorized, the ninth test will be an online test where the answers can be quickly accessed by using RONR. This is intended to replicate what happens in the real world when a parliamentarian is faced with a new situation when referring to the book is needed to provide the appropriate advice. The Commission imagines that eventually, the PRP candidate will complete a similar process using the Competencies and Performance Expectations for the PRP. But it was necessary to focus only on the RP first.

The Commission received another generous grant from the NAP Educational Foundation to obtain the use of an online testing system provided by Schoology.

This system was selected after careful comparison of the options available.

The Commission has committed to arranging reasonable accommodation for those who are not able to take the tests online. The Commission has currently identified highly skilled PRP Preliminary Reviewers who will do an initial evaluation of all the questions submitted by the Drafting Committees for accuracy, and then the Commission will perform a final review of them. Thereafter, forty-one already credentialed members have volunteered to do Alpha testing of the questions. If this goes well, it will be followed by Beta testing. The Beta 12

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

testers will be non-credentialed members who wish to become RPs. The Commission will provide adequate notice of when this first phase of the new credentialing system will be implemented. A report on the current status of progress toward this goal will be presented at the upcoming NAP convention.

While development of the RP Step One questions has been underway, the Commission has also been holding multiple meetings to start work on the Step Two assessment of RPs. This step will involve written assignments testing the kinds of tasks that parliamentarians typically do outside of actual meetings.

For example, assessments will include script writing, preparing bylaws amendments, and assisting with the training of election committees and tellers. These will be open book assignments which candidates may complete using any references they find helpful.

The final Step Three assessment will involve scenario situations in which the candidates will demonstrate their ability to serve as parliamentarians in meeting simulations. The details of this step are yet to be devised.

A problem that must be fixed this year The bylaws amendment that created the Commission adopted

by the 2015 convention was based on a proposal developed by the Special Committee on Education and Credentialing. However, it was amended by the assembly in a very significant way. The original proposal had provided for the Commissioners to be appointed by the NAP Board.

There was a proviso that started the staggered terms with two members initially getting 3 year terms; two members with 2 year terms; and two members with a 1 year term.

The assembly decided that the Commissioners would not be elected by the Board, but instead elected by the already credentialed members of NAP, i.e. those who already have an RP or PRP designation. This amendment to the bylaw amendment was adopted, and then the bylaw amendment itself was adopted.

However, the proviso was not altered.

This happened at the very end of the convention business meeting, and once it was done, several NAP members noticed a big problem. The bylaws amendment has no provision for when and how the credentialed members vote on candidates for the Commission. Under the unchanged proviso, the board was able to make the initial appointments. Six members were appointed creating the staggered terms. (There were three resignations among those initial members. This is a very difficult and time-consuming assignment, and because of personal

reasons, three of the initial six people needed to resign. They were replaced by the board. Later one of the original members was reappointed.)

When the two Commissioners who had one year terms had completed their service, there was no clear mechanism to elect their successors.

That left only four Commissioners.

These four Commissioners immediately created a Consulting Committee to advise them. This mostly consisted of the former Commissioners who had been doing excellent work and would have been seriously missed.

We are now approaching the Fall 2017 convention when another two of the Commissioners will be completing their two-year terms with no clear provision for replacing them.

This is why it is essential that one of the bylaw amendments that are being proposed to clarify the means of electing Commissioners to the Credentialing Commission is passed this September. Without one of them, the Commission will only have two members left, and their term will end before the 2019 convention. In other words, failure to fix this problem means that the Commission will never be able to complete its work.

The Commission takes no position on the merits of the competing proposals to do so, but sincerely hopes that the convention, in its wisdom, will adopt some method to ensure that the Commission can continue. www.parliamentarians.org

13

Commission on Credentialing continued What you need to know if you want to be a Commissioner There are several different proposals for amending this bylaw that will be presented in September.

All of them will require candidates to stand for election. There will be four seats that need to be filled. All of the current Commissioners and Consulting Committee members have agreed that if you are interested, you should consider the following: > Do you have enough time to devote to this very challenging job?

— The current members have met in Las Vegas for three and four day marathon sessions that are only partly subsidized by NAP with the balance of the expenses being paid by the members. So far in the first two years, there have been five such meetings.

— They also have met frequently on Adobe Connect for 3-4 hour working meetings where their work outside the meeting was evaluated and edited.

— There are also in-person meetings in conjunction with the convention and the NAP Training Conference. > Do you have expertise in teaching and testing? Do you have the parliamentary expertise that is needed to write great assessments? > Do you want to have a significant impact on the future of NAP and the achievement of our goal of providing excellent service to our clients?

If your answer to these questions is “yes,” then consider running for a position as a Commissioner. All of the current members agree that it has been one of the most difficult and rewarding things we have done as parliamentarians.

The Commission on Credentialing: (left to right) Gail Knapp, PRP, Commission vice-chair; Jim Stewart, PRP, Consulting Committee; Gayla Stone, PRP, Consulting Committee; Thomas Balch, PRP, Commission chair; Wanda Davis, PRP, commissioner; Rosalie Stroman, PRP, commissioner; Maurice Henderson, PRP, Consulting Committee.

14

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

Methods of Nominating

with a Focus on the Nominating Committee Dennis Clark, PRP

While many of us may know that there are six methods for nominating candidates for various offices, committees, chairmanships, etc., we may not be aware that there is an order of rank among the methods. I will address this ranking later in the article— why the ranking might become an issue in a real meeting, and why the six forms are ranked as they are.

It is important to understand the concept that a nomination is treated as if it were a motion to fill a blank. As stated in RONR (11th ed.), p. 430, ll. 4-6, “A nomination is, in effect, a proposal to fill a blank in an assumed motion ‘that _____ be elected’ to the specified position.”

In the case of an election for officers, the main motion is to elect a president; the nomination is the method used to fill the blank for that office. There are six methods for filling the nomination blank. The method by which the nominations are to be made is ordinarily found in the bylaws of the organization.

For the election of officers, many organizations use the nominating committee as a method of putting forth at least one nomination,

www.parliamentarians.org

15

with nominations from the floor almost always being taken after the report of the nominating committee.

It should be noted that, by default, nominations from the floor are always in order after the report of a nominating committee and should be included specifically in the bylaws.

Let’s turn to the six forms of nomination. Few organizations use nomination by ballot, mail or petition and I will only briefly mention them in this article. There is a definite ranking of the six forms of nominations. The rank is as follows: by the chair, from the floor, by committee, by ballot, by mail, and by petition. Ranking would come into play if the bylaws were silent on the method of nomination for either an election of officers, committee members, delegates, etc. In that case a member might offer a motion to have the nomination by any one of the six forms. Another member might choose to move to amend that motion by striking out the form noted in the main motion and inserting another form. In fact, someone might move to create a blank so that all six forms might be pending at once. (Wouldn’t that be a fun parliamentary exercise?)

If this were to occur, the voting would start with the form first mentioned in RONR (11th ed.), pp. 431-38, (i.e. nomination by the chair) and continue until one of the forms received a majority vote.

One may wonder why the six forms are listed in the order they are: was it alphabetical, by lot or chance, 16

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

by the order they were thought up by the author? No: As in practically all of the manual, their order is based on logic tempered by fairness, majority rule/minority rights, and efficiency.

So as we take a quick look at the six, we will be looking to determine which of them seems the most efficient method of nomination, and that is the one that would be voted on first in the odd event that all six are pending at one time. At the other end of the spectrum, those forms of nomination that would be voted on last (i.e. those that allow more input by the largest number of members) if some or all were pending would seem to be more democratic than those voted on first.

Nomination by Chair The first form of nomination is nomination by the chair. Certainly this is the quickest form of nomination and the most efficient. This form is especially suited for mass meetings.

In ordinary societies a main motion to commit an action or a motion to refer a pending motion might direct the chair to nominate members for committees or even offices. It is important to note, however, that if the bylaws give power to the president to appoint standing or special committees or both, the president alone holds that power, so a motion by the assembly to commit may not otherwise direct. Some bylaws state that the president appoints all standing and special committees except for the nominating committee.

1

Nomination from the Floor The second form of nomination is nomination from the floor. Unless the bylaws state otherwise, nominations from the floor are always in order after the report of the nominating committee.

2

3

Nominating Committee The third form of nomination is the one that is the most common for most societies—the nominating committee. The purpose of this form is to have a committee investigate and report to the electing body a slate of nominees who presumably best meet the needs of the society.

However, RONR only provides directions on the machinations of the nominating committee and does not provide direction on what factors the committee ought to consider in determining what the desirable characteristics might be for possible nominees.

While the nominating committee seems to be the most widely used form of nomination, it is not without issue. Over the course of my career many questions arose from groups that were in the process of conducting elections and many of those questions centered on improprieties associated with the nominating committee.

Questions arose such as what happens if this committee is not selected within the prescribed amount of time set by the bylaws, or if the committee is never able to make a quorum or even meet prior to the time prescribed for its report; or whether an alternate

who substituted at a meeting for an absent committee member also should serve at future meetings.

It has been my experience that even more serious issues arise when it becomes clear that a nominating committee has selected a slate that clearly does not best address the needs of the society but, rather, is based on politically motivated reasons. One group with which I’ve worked had a nominating committee of eleven members with six members constituting a quorum. At its first and only meeting the committee barely met quorum and nominated some of its own members to fill three of the five offices that were to be filled.

While this is permissible according to RONR, it was apparent that the committee did not go far outside of its meeting room to find qualified nominees. Additionally, one of the nominees on the slate was nominated for reelection to the same office even though that member did not perform the duties of that office during the first term, while an officer who had fulfilled the responsibilities of the current office and was seeking election to a higher office was not selected for any position on the slate even though that member had indicated willingness to serve if elected. There was some speculation that this individual was not acceptable to some on the committee due to personality conflicts with two members of the nominating committee who were at the meeting. In any event, the society had no recourse but to www.parliamentarians.org

17

hear the report of the committee and then take nominations from the floor to circumvent it. However, the slate presented by the nominating committee seems to carry great weight with the members entitled to vote in the election and it is difficult for nominees from the floor to be elected in most circumstances.

In Parliamentary Questions and Answers II—National Association of Parliamentarians (taken from early editions of the NP) Mrs. A.K. Newby wrote the following in answer to a question about nominating committees: “Nominations by a committee are truly democratic as there is always opportunity for nominations from the floor, yet it is equally true that in nine times out of ten the members whose names are presented by the nominating committee are elected to office.” (p. 167) Given that power, if the nominating committee for any organization continuously allows politics to be a factor instead of finding qualified candidates who it is believed will conscientiously perform their duties, then the society may wish to consider amending the bylaws to provide nominations from the floor only and dispensing with the nominating committee altogether.

Otherwise, the organization will

suffer a potential loss in membership as members discover that their officers are being selected in part for political reason only.

Potential issues that may arise with a nominating committee are such that, unless a society has real problems having qualified candidates coming forward to serve—then there is no need for a nominating committee at all. Incidentally, the National Association of Parliamentarians dispensed with the nominating committee form some years ago due to the fact that there was never a dearth of qualified candidates.

Ballot, Mail, Petition The three remaining forms of nomination, by ballot, mail and petition have not been addressed in this article as they are used less frequently than the first three forms.

The last two forms (ballot and petition) are likely to be used by organizations with widely dispersed memberships such as national or international associations or those in which election is done by mail rather that at a convention.

4

5

6

The author wishes to thank cartoonist Susan Mattinson, who writes the cartoon script Pastor Shep, for allowing publication of her cartoon on p. 15.

Dennis Clark, PRP, became a member of NAP in 1974 and was credentialed in 1976. He is a twice past president of the Texas State Association of Parliamentarians (1987-88 and 2014-15). He is a retired teacher and paralegal and works full time as a professional parliamentarian, writer, and speaker.

18

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

The Whole Consideration

By Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP, CPP © 2017

Many times, members want to talk about some subject during a meeting; they often want this to be a new subject. The current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised (RONR, 11th ed.) notes that “Until a matter has been brought before the assembly in the form of a motion proposing specific action, it cannot be debated (p. 386, ll. 6-8).” Debate is a consequence of making a debatable motion1.

Occasionally, some member will even make a motion, “That we discuss _____ .” The motion is out of order, on the ground that the motion “contains no rational proposition (RONR, p. 342, ll. 19-21.).” The member, usually not skilled in parliamentary procedure, wants to discuss something and hopes that talking about the issue will lead some result.

If permitted, it would be more likely to lead to a great deal of confusion, and wasted time, with the members not even agreeing on the conclusion.

Is it possible that the assembly can discuss something, a new topic, without a main motion? In a roundabout way, yes.

A main motion is needed, but that main motion need not be the one that would propose something substantive to be done. www.parliamentarians.org

19

It is possible for the assembly to make a main motion to refer something to a committee. A member may move, “That we discuss creating a scholarship for the children of our members,” which would be out of order. The same member may move, as a main motion, “That we establish a committee to investigate the possibility of creating a scholarship for the children of our members.” That is a main motion, not a subsidiary motion to commit. It may be not even be an incidental main motion. If, as in this case, the assembly never dealt with the subject before, it is an original main motion (RONR, p. 168, ll. 29-35).2 However, the committee created by a main motion still functions as would a committee created by a subsidiary motion. For example, the motion could include a clause as to when the committee to report back to the assembly (RONR, p. 172, ll. 5-14). So, a committee of the assembly can discuss the issue, but how could the assembly discuss this?

The answer is that the assembly can resolve itself into a committee of the whole. In this process, while the members of the assembly remain in the room, the meeting is not technically of the assembly, but of a committee made up of all the members of the assembly (RONR, p. 531, ll. 10-21).

The member may move, “That the assembly go into a committee of the whole to investigate the possibility of creating a scholarship for the children of our members. (RONR, p. 532, ll. 4-8).” The motion to go into a committee of the whole, in this case, is a main motion, as there is no motion pending, in exactly the same way that the a main motion can establish an ordinary committee. Like an ordinary committee, the assembly may give instructions to the committee of the whole, in the motion creating it, which would include a time to rise and report (RONR, p. 532, ll. 9-10).

RONR 11th ed. notes specifically, that resolutions may originate from a committee of the whole (RONR, p. 532, ll. 31-35). In this hypothetical case, the committee may draft a motion to establish scholarship, including such things like the amount of the scholarship, and the criteria for awarding it, and refer the resolution to the assembly. It might also recommend that the assembly not establish a scholarship or that the question be referred to a select committee, provided there is nothing in the instructions to prevent it.

20

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

There is a non-hypothetical example of this, from the Village of Ardencroft, Delaware. Ardencroft is one of the three localities3 in the state that are governed by a town meeting; the residents attended bimonthly meetings, much like the famous New England town meetings. The town meeting is governed by a charter, created as legislation by the state, and the rules adoptive by the meeting, including RONR. Recently, the resident wanted to consider asking the legislature to change its charter. How could the meeting come up with a list of changes?

The village meeting went into a committee of the whole, with no motion pending, to consider possible recommendations to change; they also instructed the committee to report by 9:00 p.m. At 9:00 p.m., the committee of the whole rose and reported three separate recommendations for changes in the charter. Technically, three separate recommendations were reported by the committee, each of which is an independent main motion (Hall, p. 3). It was ultimately a timesaver, even with a full and robust debate of each proposal.

Another overlooked use for the committee of the whole would be to use to investigate and draft charges when the specific causes are well known (RONR, pp. 656-62). For example, the member might have been charged and convicted of action that is both criminal and that would render him unfit for membership,4 which was well known to the members of the society due to media coverage. The assembly could go into a committee of the whole and draft charges, and then report back these draft charges to the assembly.

While some general topic can be referred to a committee of the whole (or to a regular committee), the same is not true for its alternate forms, a quasi committee of the whole or informal consideration. RONR notes that, “unlike the processes of quasi committee of the whole and informal consideration, a committee of the whole is a real committee in a parliamentary sense (RONR, p. 531, ll. 15-17).� RONR also notes that a quasi committee of the whole is not a real committee (RONR, p. 538, ll. 15-17). Informal consideration does not involve the assembly reporting anything at the end of that consideration and likewise, is not a real committee (RONR, p. 541, ll. 11-13).5 By referring some general topic to a committee of the whole the assembly can do several things. The assembly can permit www.parliamentarians.org

21

something to be discussed without a specific main motion.

It can get input from all the members in forming the motion.

It can form specific main motions that will go before the assembly. This process can save time and result in well-crafted motions.

Endnotes 1 Though debate may be limited by motion or by special rule (see RONR, 11th ed., pp. 390-91).

2 The sole difference is that an incidental main motion is not subject to Objection to the Consideration of the Question while an original main motion is subject to that motion (RONR, 11th ed., p. 268, ll. 1-4).

3 Ardencroft, and the neighboring towns of Arden, and Ardentown, are unique in Delaware, and possibly in the Mid-Atlantic states, for having a town meeting form of government.

4 It is not uncommon for many organizations to have incarcerated members, and chose not remove them. For example, both the Penn State Alumni Association and the American Mensa Society have incarcerated members, the latter including a member on death row in Florida. In each society, the members’ offenses received national media coverage and were well known to the members. The author is a member of both organizations.

5 The author is grateful for the on-line discussion and explanations on this point with two members of the authorship team of 11th edition, Daniel Honemann, Esq. and Shmuel Gerber, PRP.

Works Cited Hall, Eugenia. Minutes of the Village of Ardencroft Meeting, January 19, 2017.

Robert, 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, is the president of the Delaware Valley Unit. He also had the privilege of serving as the parliamentarian for the town meetings of the Village of Ardencroft, Delaware, in 2016-17.

22

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

NAP

41st Biennial Convention

September 8-11, 2017 • Chicago, Illinois Convention Preview Call to Convention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 NAP Leadership Conference . . . . . . . . . 25 2017 Pre-Convention Events . . . . . . . 26 2017 Convention Schedule . . . . . . . . . 26 Educational Sessions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Photo Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Activities & Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Hotel Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 How to Register . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

www.parliamentarians.org

23

NAP 41st Biennial Convention September 8-11, 2017 • Chicago, Illinois

Call to Convention Join Us for NAP’s 41st Biennial Convention September 8-11, 2017 Westin Lombard Yorktown Center Lombard, IL We’re Rising Higher Together when NAP goes to Chicago!

There’s always something new to learn, new people to meet, new experiences to share, that’s what makes the NAP biennial convention a must-attend event. From the first pre-convention events through the closing session, convention is the place to hone skills, expand knowledge, and learn from others.

This year’s convention will feature: • More than 35 educational offerings designed to help you be a better parliamentarian, regardless of your experience level.

• NAP’s biennial business meeting, where you’ll experience parliamentary procedure in action as nearly 400 delegates debate bylaws amendments, elect a new board, and set the course of the organization.

• Professional parliamentarian credentialing and renewal courses • NAP Leadership Conference to prepare you for leadership roles in your units, clubs, and state associations.

• Network building, because your interactions outside the meetings and presentations are just as important as what you learn inside.

Plan to arrive early and enjoy all the sights, sounds, food, and fun of Chicago. The Westin is offering the discounted NAP room rates September 3 through September 15. At the very least, come in early enough to go on the Navy Pier Tour that the Illinois State Association of Parliamentarians has organized for us.

Meet us in Chicago—you’ll be glad you did!

24

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

NAP Leadership Conference September 7, 2017 • Chicago, Illinois

Preparing for Leadership: When September 7, 2017

A New Perspective Prepare to lead your unit, club, association, NAP, and other organizations to which you belong with grace and passion. Attend NAP’s 2017 Leadership Conference.

The theme for this year’s interactive full-day workshop is “Preparing for Leadership: A New Perspective” and that’s exactly what you can expect to gain.

8:30 a.m.–5 p.m.

Where Westin Lombard Yorktown Center 70 Yorktown Center Lombard, IL 60148

Come ready to engage as we

Registration Early Bird (by 6/30): $95

• assess your leadership style and beliefs

Regular (7/1-7/15): $115

• discuss and illustrate the latest leadership trends and issues of today’s society • discuss and demonstrate RONR concepts • explore training techniques for RONR 11th edition and the practice of presiding

Workshop Coordinators Cynthia Mayo, PRP Coordinator Margie Booker, PRP Assistant Coordinator

Register Online:

www.parliamentarians.org www.parliamentarians.org

25

NAP 41st Biennial Convention September 8-11, 2017 • Chicago, Illinois

2017 Pre-Convention Events (Tentative as of March 1, 2017 – Schedule is subject to change)

NAP PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COURSES Wednesday, September 6, 2017 8:30 a.m.-6:30 p.m.

8:30 a.m.-6:30 p.m.

PRP Qualifying Course (PQC) PRP Renewal Course (PRC)

Thursday, September 7, 2017 8:30 a.m.-6:30 p.m.

8:30 a.m.-6:30 p.m.

PRP Qualifying Course (PQC) PRP Renewal Course (PRC)

NAP LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE Thursday, September 7, 2017 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.

NAP Leadership Conference

NAP EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION Friday, September 8, 2017 8:30 a.m.-9:15 a.m.

9:30 a.m.-Noon

NAP Educational Foundation Board of Trustees Annual Meeting NAPEF Brunch & Auction

2017 Convention Schedule (Tentative as of March 1, 2017 – Schedule is subject to change)

Thursday, September 7, 2017 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.

12 p.m.-1:30 p.m.

1 p.m.-6 p.m.

5 p.m.-10 p.m.

26

NAP Board of Directors Meeting Open Lunch with NAP Board Members Registration & Voting Credentials Open Trip to Navy Pier (Downtown Chicago)

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

Friday, September 8, 2017 8 a.m.-12:30 p.m.

8 a.m.-12:30 p.m.

8 a.m.-Noon 1 p.m.-5 p.m.

5:30 p.m.-7:30 p.m.

8 p.m.-10 p.m.

Registration & Voting Credentials Open NAP Bookstore Open RP/Membership Exam Opening NAP Biennial Business Meeting Bylaws Forum District/Committee Meetings

Saturday, September 9, 2017 7:30 a.m.-8:30 a.m.

8:30 a.m.-Noon 12:15 p.m.-2 p.m.

2 p.m.-4:30 p.m.

2 p.m.-5:30 p.m.

2:15 p.m.-3:30 p.m.

3:45 p.m.-5 p.m.

7 p.m.-10 p.m.

Registration & Voting Credentials Open NAP Biennial Business Meeting (cont.)

Membership & Youth Recognition Lunch Registration Open NAP Bookstore Open Educational Workshops Educational Workshops Silver & Blue Gala: An Evening of Celebration (evening attire)

Sunday, September 10, 2017 7 a.m.-8 a.m.

7:30 a.m.-8:30 a.m.

8:30 a.m.-Noon 12:15 p.m.-1:45 p.m.

1:30 p.m.-6 p.m.

2 p.m.-3:15 p.m.

3:30 p.m.-5 p.m.

3:30 p.m.-5 p.m.

Inspirational Service (nondenominational) Registration & Voting Credentials Open NAP Biennial Business Meeting (cont.)

Past Presidents Lunch NAP Bookstore Open Educational Workshops Educational Workshops 2017-2019 Board of Directors Meeting

Monday, September 11, 2017 8:30 a.m.-10 a.m.

8:30 a.m.-10 a.m.

10:15 a.m.-11:15 a.m.

11:30 a.m.-Noon

Commission on Credentialing Plenary Session Educational Workshops New Administration Introduction Closing Session

Tuesday, September 12, 2017 8:30 a.m.-1 p.m.

2017-2019 Board of Directors Meeting www.parliamentarians.org

27

NAP 41st Biennial Convention September 8-11, 2017 • Chicago, Illinois

Educational Sessions The following is a partial list of the educational sessions planned for the 2017 NAP Convention, September 8-11. There will be 35 sessions in all; watch the NAP convention website (www.parliamentarians.org/convention) for the full list. (All sessions are subject to change.)

An Electronic Dais on a Budget Gregory A. Goodwiller, PRP So sure, if you have tens of thousands of dollars (or more) to spend, you can have amazing electronic dais procedures that are professional, user friendly, and unobtrusive. But what if you’re on a budget? Come and learn how this NAP convention’s dais is using electronics for scripts, microphone queues, speaker timing, voting, motion amendments, and more, for very little cost—and how you can employ these technologies in organizations with which you work.

Behind Closed Doors Darlene Allen, PRP The work done by committees is important to the success of an organization. This workshop will briefly review how committees are created and examine committee deliberations. A successful committee should work its plan and its work.

28

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

Can I Interrupt?

Deborah Arrington, PRP This interactive workshop will be used to identify and practice various uses of motions that can interrupt while business is pending.

Follow the Leader David Mezzera, PRP Experiments, practices, and shared experiences will help participants better think like and act like leaders in parliamentary circumstances.

Freedom of Speech, but Not in Robert Lorenzo R. Cuesta, PRP A deliberative assembly’s full and free discussion does not mean that every person has the right to speak. This misconception leads to 3-hour meetings that should be only 30 minutes! The presiding officer’s tools will be shared to prove this fact based on effective debate protocol in accordance with Robert.

From Abysmal to Amazing Dr. Romona Marsalis-Hill, PRP This workshop will discuss the knowledge required for effective meeting management and the actions required for effective meeting management implementation. A discussion of procedural rules that participants need to be familiar with and comfortable using will be explored.

Great Things Come in Small Packages Steven Cook, PRP It is a common rule of thumb that 80% of the work is done by 20% of the people. This phenomenon occurs in nature and is known by a variety of names, including Pareto Principle, the law of the Vital Few, and the principle of Factor Sparsity.

This workshop will walk you through how boards and committees can help create an effective deliberative assembly. This will be accomplished through several innovative training scenarios of small groups that will act as either the board(s) and/or committee(s).

Knowledge Is (Negotiating) Power!

Donald Garrett, PRP In this workshop, attendees will learn how to access public nonprofit tax return information to assist when negotiating fees for their parliamentary services.

Leadership: Required Skills That Are Not Taught in RONR Cody McCain, PRP Join this fun and interactive workshop in leadership skills.

Through the use of activities, attendees will learn the importance of and how to improve leadership skills such as delegating, teamwork, and communication.

Mock Disciplinary Trial Todd Crowder, PRP This workshop will provide a demonstration of a disciplinary trial as detailed in RONR with explanations and questions and answers.

My Problem Is Worse Than Yours Ann Guiberson, PRP Participate in a facilitated discussion of current, real-world problems parliamentarians face in serving clients. Bring your thorniest issues and let’s work on them together. Here’s one for starters, “What are optimum ways to serve as a parliamentarian for board meetings conducted through telephone conference calls?” What’s yours? Bring it!

Lurkers are not allowed. Everyone will help to get the answers.

Indicates advanced workshop www.parliamentarians.org

29

NAP 41st Biennial Convention September 8-11, 2017 • Chicago, Illinois Officers: Enough Already Michael Peck, PRP This workshop will provide a study of the offices in RONR and elsewhere, including a review of the rank and duties of those elected and appointed.

Parliamentary Teams Ready for Action Sandy Olson, PRP This workshop will practice using team training exercises as you develop skills and insight into the “fun” world of parliamentary team training.

dealing with bullies in a meeting, and making your case with charm and confidence.

Real World Problem Solving Jeanette N. Williams, PRP This workshop will focus on situations that a parliamentarian may encounter either when preparing for a meeting or while “on the job.” Various scenarios will be presented, and small groups of individuals will develop a solution or solutions for that problem.

Passing the RP Exam: You Can Do It! Frances Jackson, PRP After being a member of NAP for 20 years, the presenter finally took the RP Exam. This workshop details how she did it, pitfalls along the way, and specific, easy-to-follow advice to help you pass it as well.

Power and Persuasion in Debate Alison Wallis, PRP This workshop will give guidance on how to use debate powerfully and persuasively to get your way, democratically. We will discuss permissible and impermissible debate, decorum, timing of motions and remarks, combating a dictatorial chair, persuading others,

30

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

Rewind: Reconsider, Rescind, and Renew Paul McClintock, PRP Rattled over the rules for Reconsidering, Rescinding, or Renewing a motion? Learn how these motions overlap, their distinctions, and restrictions.

RONR – Credit Course 599 Pat Knoll, PRP A comprehensive presentation on the construction and roll out of a 30-hour university course in parliamentary law, the challenges involved, and pointers for successful development.

Setting Goals, Managing Conflict, and Making Decisions Olivia Headley, PRP This workshop will provide a demonstration to help and assist meeting specialists.

Some Pointed Comments About Boards and Committees Daniel Evan Seabold, PRP Who is in charge of our organization—the board or the members? What are the limits to the board’s authority and what can we do when the board exceeds those limits? How do we regain control of committees that don’t do what they are told?

Starting a Unit Facebook Page Abby Lee Hood, PRP Have you wanted to promote or organize your unit or group via Facebook? Learn why, how, and get started easily.

The Art of Presiding for Non-Parliamentarians Kirk Overbey, PRP Presiding is as much about public speaking as procedure.

This workshop is designed for youth and those who are not parliamentarians. It introduces the basics of presiding in a fun and interactive way without the normal rigor of an NAP meeting.

Voting Richard D. Hayes, PRP This workshop will explore 18 voting methodologies and their applications.

Indicates advanced workshop

Photo Opportunities at the 41st Biennial Convention If you’ve ever visited www.parliamentarians.smugmug.com, you know that NAP’s Photo Committee—Robert and Jeanette Williams—have memorialized the organization’s national events over the years. They take hundreds of photos to help tell the story of the biennial convention and training conference experience.

By registering for the event, you grant NAP permission to use your photo in editorial and promotional materials. If you do not wish to be photographed, please email NAP at hq@nap2.org by no later than September 7. (This does not include group shots.)

If you wish to arrange a special photo opportunity while at convention, let the photography team know when you see them on-site or prior to the convention. They will coordinate with you on an appropriate time and place.

All photographs are available for viewing and downloading (without charge to members) at www.parliamentarians.smugmug.com. Each event has its own photo album or, if you’re looking for pictures of a specific individual, you can search by name.

Every effort is made to caption each photo; members have been extremely helpful in filling in the gaps.

Photo committee: Bob Williams, photographer, rrw@prodigy.net

Jeanette Williams, PRP (who makes sure Bob is at the right place at the right time!), Jn-williams@prodigy.net www.parliamentarians.org

31

NAP 41st Biennial Convention September 8-11, 2017 • Chicago, Illinois

Activities & Highlights The following are some of the special activities planned for before and during the convention. Please note that some require separate registration.

Professional Development Courses September 6-7, 2017 Whether you are going for your Professional Registered Parliamentarian® credential or renewing it, you can do it all in one of the two-day courses on September 6 and 7. Both the Professional Qualifying Course (PQC), for those seeking their credential, and the Professional Renewal Course (PRC), for those renewing, will meet 8:30 a.m.-6 p.m., Wednesday, September 6 and Thursday, September 7.

Separate registration is required.

Pre-course assignments will be distributed about 30 days prior to the course.

CANCELLATION POLICY Requests for refund of convention fees must be received in writing by NAP Headquarters no later than August 15, 2017. A $75 cancellation fee will apply. No refunds will be issued for no-shows or cancellations received after August 15, 2017.

A $30 handling fee will be assessed for all returned checks.

32

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

Navy Pier Excursion September 7, 2017 The Illinois State Association invites you to spend several hours enjoying the many sights, shops, and activities of Chicago’s famous Navy Pier. Your $50 ticket includes roundtrip transportation and a ride on the Centennial Wheel, modeled after the first Ferris Wheel that debuted at the Chicago 1893 World’s Fair. Navy Pier is home to the beautiful Crystal Gardens, a food court, restaurants, a board walk, and boat tours. A great time is sure to be had by all.

NAP Onsite Bookstore September 8-10, 2017 Check out what’s new and stock up on your favorite study and teaching tools in the onsite NAP bookstore and save shipping fees.

Remember to shop early as we never know what the hottest sellers are going to be.

See the convention schedule for the bookstore’s hours.

Membership and RP Exam Session September 8, 2017 On Friday, September 8, from 8 a.m. until noon, you may take up to three parts of the Registered Parliamentarian® exam. Larry Martin, PRP, chairman of NAP’s Membership and Registered Examiners Committee, will be the monitor. Which parts you take is up to you.

Anyone wishing to join NAP onsite can take the membership exam at this time as well. The exam is based on the Robert’s Rules of Order, In Brief (2nd Edition). A free downloadable study guide is available in the NAP Online store at www.parliamentarians.org.

A membership application must be submitted separately.

Applicant and fees for these exams should be sent to NAP separately from your convention registration.

The applications are available online.

NAPEF Breakfast, Auction, and Annual Meeting September 8, 2017 The NAP Educational Foundation (NAPEF) is a supporting organization that plays an important role in furthering the education of parliamentarians through grants to NAP and other organizations. Find out what NAPEF is doing by joining them for breakfast and other fun activities on Friday, September 8, 8:30 a.m.-Noon.

This is a ticketed event; $15 of the ticket price is tax deductible.

All proceeds will support NAPEF’s grant program.

Bylaws Forum: A Preview of What’s to Come September 8, 2017 Friday, September 8, 5:30 p.m.-7 p.m., Bylaws Committee Chair Weldon Merritt, PRP, will be available to answer any of your questions about the proposed bylaws amendments to be considered during the business meetings. Bring your bylaws booklet and questions.

District Meetings September 8, 2017 Connect with others from your area during the district meetings on Friday, September 8, 8 p.m.-10 p.m.

www.parliamentarians.org

33

NAP 41st Biennial Convention September 8-11, 2017 • Chicago, Illinois National Youth Day September 9, 2017 NAP’s Youth Committee will focus on youth and young adults studying parliamentary procedure in the 4th National Youth Day program during the convention on Saturday, September 9. Attendees will include the national student parliamentarians of each of the six Career and Technical Student Organization partners of NAP. Youth (and advisors) attending Youth Day will find it interesting to observe the Saturday morning

convention business meeting with parliamentarians actively…and sometimes dramatically…carrying out “all of the motions in the book.” Afternoon workshops will offer opportunities to participate in discussions and activities with parliamentarians.

This special program is funded in part by a grant from the NAP Educational Foundation.

Separate registration is required and includes the Membership and Youth Recognition Lunch, a perfect opportunity to network.

The Blue & Silver Gala* An Evening of Celebration

Saturday, September 9, 2017 6 p.m. to 10 p.m.

Westin Hotel Yorktown Center • 70 Yorktown Center, Lombard, IL Tickets: $85 Join us for an evening of music, dancing, and celebration at this new feature of the NAP biennial convention.

Purchase tickets from your point of contact, call 773-480-6616, or visit www.parliamentarians.org online store and select the Featured Product 2017 Silver & Blue Gala ($5 Raffle tickets sold at event) *Black tie event

34

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

Hotel Highlights Westin Lombard Yorktown Center 70 Yorktown Shopping Center Lombard, IL 60148 www.westinlombard.com

The Westin Yorktown Center in the village of Lombard, Illinois (a suburb of Chicago), is the site of the 41st Biennial Convention. It’s situated right across from Yorktown Center, an indoor shopping center with shopping and restaurants galore.

The hotel is located about 15 miles from both Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport and Midway Airport. NAP has arranged for special discount rates from Windy City Transportation for ROOM RATES car service to and from the airport. (See NAP for 2017 website for link.)

Convention are: You can make your reservation online at www.starwoodmeeting.com/StarGroupsWeb/ $134 (plus taxes) res?id=1609151329&key=24797C08 or by

single/double calling the Westin at 888-627-9031. $149 (plus taxes) Be sure to say you are with the NAP

triple 41st Biennial Convention to get the discounted $164 (plus taxes) rates, which are effective Sunday, September 3,

quad through Friday, September 15. The reservation deadline is 5 p.m. CT, August 15, 2017.

www.parliamentarians.org

35

NAP 41st Biennial Convention September 8-11, 2017 • Chicago, Illinois

How to Register Registering for the 41st Biennial Convention is easy. Choose one of these convenient, secure options: • Register online or by phone with your MasterCard, Visa, or Discover card.

• Mail or fax the registration form included with this issue and return it to NAP Headquarters with your credit card information or check (payable to NAP) Registration & Activity Fees Convention registration fees include admission to daily business meetings; all educational workshops and a flash drive containing speaker handouts; President’s Welcome Reception (Friday), and daily refreshment breaks; and souvenir journal.

Primary Registration Fees Full Convention Early Bird (by July 15) Regular (July 16-Aug. 15) (After Aug. 15) Two-Day Early Bird (by July 15) Regular (July 1-Aug. 15) (After Aug. 15)

Member

Nonmember

Student

$275 $310 $330

$330 $360 $390

$130 $150 $160

$185 $200 $235

$235 $255 $275

$85 $100 $110

ADDITIONAL FEES Printed Workshop Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $15/copy Navy Pier Excursion (hosted by Illinois State Association) . . . . . . . . . . $50/person A LA CARTE MEALS (Available to all registrants.)

Board and Leadership Luncheon (Thursday, Sept. 7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $45 NAPEF Breakfast & Auction (Friday, Sept. 8) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $56 Membership & Youth Recognition Luncheon (Saturday, Sept. 9) . . . . . . . . . . . $45 Silver & Blue Gala (Saturday, Sept. 9) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $85 Past Presidents Luncheon (Sunday, Sept. 10) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $50

Cancellation Policy – See page 32 36

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

Take a Breath of Fresh Air in the Windy City You are invited to take a deep breath and join in on the exciting activities at the

NAP Educational Foundation (NAPEF) brunch and annual meeting on Friday, September 8, 2017, at the Westin Lombard Yorktown Center Hotel.

This is the very first opportunity to meet with your friends from all parts of the parliamentary world and learn what programs and grants your contributions have been supporting. Your Foundation is excited about all the possibilities of providing grants to NAP and to the associations. Come and learn more about it.

The day begins with the NAPEF annual meeting at 8:30 a.m. followed by brunch at 9:30 a.m. with a raffle. A second edition ROR will be available as well as drawings for beautiful gift baskets.

All contributions are used to support NAP’s education programs, new or updated books and materials, the Credentialing Commission’s work, or innovative association educational program that will bring benefit to all NAP members.

Every member can be a part of the foundation by contributing directly to NAPEF, by attending the brunch and by participating in other fundraising activities.

Register now for the Educational Foundation brunch.

If you cannot attend the brunch, please make a donation today on the website: napef.org.

Click on the big red button and select your amount. Everything helps education in parliamentary procedure for members.

Join your friends and fellow donors by being a breath of fresh air today! www.parliamentarians.org

37

Nominee for Office Editor’s note: The following candidate for the 2017-2019 Board of Directors was inadvertently omitted from the candidate section in the spring issue.

D irector-At- L arge Ann Rempel, PRP I am asking for the support of NAP members for election again to the office of NAP Director-at-Large.

I currently serve as parliamentarian for the Wichita Sunflower Unit and as an NAP Director-at-Large. I served two terms as NAP Secretary. In addition, I have served as KSAP President and District Five Director, as NAP Parliamentarian, twice as the NP editor, and also chaired NAP’s 2009 Special Committee on Governance. I have served on several other NAP committees, including Registration Examiners, Communications, Bylaws, Nominating, Professional Development, and the NAP-AIP-Robert’s Rules Association Joint Committee on the Model Nonprofit Act. If elected, I will continue to work in good faith with all members. It has always been an honor to serve NAP, and I would appreciate your vote for re-election to the position of NAP Director-at-Large.

38

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

Test Yourself

Baker’s Dozen There are indeed thirteen different methods of casting votes that are mentioned or inferred somewhere in RONR. We as parliamentarians should be able to explain each off the top of our heads when questioned by a client, and should be able to illustrate the advantages and disadvantages of each—and when each could or should be used. Can you fill-in the blanks to list each of the thirteen?

1. S __ __ __ of H __ __ __ __ 2. R __ __ __ __ __ 3. R __ __ __ __ __ C __ __ __ __ __ __ 4. V __ __ __ V __ __ __ (by V __ __ __ __ ) 5. S __ __ __ __ __ B __ __ __ __ __ 6. S __ __ __ __ __ B __ __ __ __ __ 7. R __ __ __ C __ __ __ 8. A __ __ __ __ __ __ __ B __ __ __ __ __ 9. P __ __ __ __ V __ __ __ __ __ 10. U __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ C __ __ __ __ __ __ 11. V __ __ __ __ __ C __ __ __ __ 12. V __ __ __ __ __ M __ __ __ __ __ __ 13. E-M __ __ __ Answers on page 44 David Mezzera, PRP, is a past president of the California State Association of Parliamentarians, past District VIII Director and currently chairs NAP’s Educational Resources Committee.

www.parliamentarians.org

39

Test Yourself

Another

Baker’s Dozen Which of the following 13 “facts” about the term Parliament is/are made up? Or are they all true?

TRUE FALSE

1. The word Parliament is derived from the Old French parlement, a form of parler (to speak).

2. There are 51 countries in the world who call their legislative body a Parliament.

3. The first legislative body in the Americas was in Virginia in 1619 and was deemed the Upper Parliament and the Lower Parliament.

4. The Parliament were a well-known doo-wop vocal group in the 1950s, originally performing as a barbershop quartet.

5. Parliament was a funk band prominent during the 1970s.

6. The term for a group of (wise?) owls seen together is a Parliament

of owls.

7. Parliament is a brand of cigarettes known for their recessed paper filters.

8. Parliament is a tiny township in Connecticut between Greenwich, CT and Manchester, CT.

9. It is estimated that over 10,000 families across America possess the last name Parliament.

10. The European Union has a supranational legislative body that is called a Parliament.

11. Parliament is the name of popular cocktail bars/pubs/lounges in such cities as Dallas, Chicago, Oakland and Omaha.

12. The Parliament Woolsack is the name of the wool-filled chair used by the Speaker of the House of Lords.

13. Above the main door to the House of Lords in London is carved: “HRH (His/Her Royal Highness) Tempers Parlament,” using the Old English spelling of Parliament.

Answers on page 44 David Mezzera, PRP, is a past president of the California State Association of Parliamentarians, past District VIII Director and currently chairs NAP’s Educational Resources Committee.

40

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

&

Test Yourself

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 NP Q&A Editor, 213 South Main Street, Independence, MO 64050, or emailed to npeditor@nap2.org.

Q

Question 49: Several years ago, our club adopted a motion, “That we purchase 500 shares of common stock in Company A.” The treasurer of the day was instructed to purchase the stock, which she did.

The stock turned out to be a very good investment, and even split three for two, so we now have 750 shares. We would like to sell 300 of these shares to help fund improvements to our club grounds.

Do we need to rescind the motion, “That we purchase 500 shares of common stock in Company A,” or do we need to amend it?

Answer: The club does need to use Amend Something Previously or Rescind.

When the motion was first adopted, it instructed an officer, the treasurer to purchase the stock. That officer followed the instruction and purchased the stock. Once the transaction was made, the motion, “That we purchase 500 shares of common stock in Company A,” was fully carried out and is no longer in force RONR (11th ed.), p. 111, ll. 24-26. The treasurer, and the assembly, need do nothing more.

It has purchased the stock.

At the next meeting, a motion “That the club sell 300 shares of the stock that it owns in Company A,” would be in order.

It should be noted that sometimes the society has a rule requiring notice for a sale of assets above a certain amount. It would be advisable to check the club’s bylaws and rules prior to making the motion to see if there is any additional requirement.

www.parliamentarians.org

41

Test Yourself

&

Questions Answers

Q

continued

Question 50: For our state organization, we elect three directors by a mail ballot; our bylaws say that they are to be chosen by a plurality.

While these directors are elected at large, our bylaws require that we list the county each person is from (our state has 45 counties). We also divide our state into five districts, which are not used to elect directors, but are mentioned in the bylaws.

Over the last several years, we have listed the region as well. This year, we had six people running, including two members that came from the same districts and three members coming from one district.

One of the candidates who lost, but was in the same district as a winning candidate, is claiming that the election is invalid because the region is on our ballot. The instruction on the ballot said “Vote for no more than three.” If he raises a point of order at the next meeting, should the election be invalidated?

Answer: Based on the information provided in this particular scenario, the inclusion of the regional information on the ballot does not invalidate the election. The inclusion is treated as a technical error, RONR (11 ed.), p. 416, ll. 10-19; RONR states: Technical errors, like the misspelling of a word or name, do not make a vote illegal if the meaning of the ballot is clear. If the meaning of one or more ballots is doubtful, they can be treated as illegal if it is impossible for them to affect the result; but if they may affect the result, the tellers report them to the chair, who immediately submits to the assembly the question of how these ballots should be recorded. When reporting doubtful ballots, the tellers must be careful whenever possible not to show how the decision would affect any of the candidates.

If a Point of Order to invalidate the election is timely entertained at the electing body’s next meeting, again, based on this scenario’s information and the above citation, the chair should rule the point not well-taken, or submit the question to the assembly for vote. Otherwise, the election is complete.

If additional information to this scenario is provided, this answer is subject to change.

42

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

&

Test Yourself

Questions Answers

Q

continued

Question 51: At our last meeting we voted to amend our bylaws. In order to amend them, we require 30 days written notice, which was given, and a two-thirds vote. A counted standing vote was taken and there were 33 in favor and 17 against. The chair declared the amendment adopted.

Later some of members realized that there was not a two-thirds vote in favor. Was the amendment properly adopted?

Answer: No, the proposed amendment was not properly adopted, but since no point of order was raised at the time, the amendment remains adopted.

If, after announcing the count, the chair simply stated: “the amendment is adopted” or “the affirmative has it and the motion is adopted” and stated nothing else, a point of order would have to have been made immediately that a 2/3 vote was required to adopt the motion. There appears to have been an error in parliamentary procedure made by the chair. The RONR Authorship Team opined on this matter themselves in their list of Official Interpretations based on the Tenth Edition of RONR. See http://www.robertsrules.com/interp_list.html#2006_18 Although the example in that official interpretation is not a proposed bylaw amendment, their rationale still holds true even though this is a case of a proposed bylaw amendment. Part of their rationale states: “It should be noted in this connection that a rule requiring a two-thirds vote (or any other fraction) of members present and voting (or of all members present) affords no protection at all to absentees; it affords protection only to a certain fraction of the members present at the time the vote is taken. In the case of a rule requiring a two-thirds vote, the rule protects a minority of any number greater than one-third of the members present. However, such rules may be suspended, and if a rule is suspendable, a point of order regarding its violation must be timely.”

In the committee’s opinion, no continuing breach of the rules applies, RONR (11 ed.), p. 251, therefore the amendment remains adopted.

Questions & Answers Research Team

Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP, CPP

Steve Britton, PRP

Roger Hanshaw, PRP

George Mervosh, III, PRP

www.parliamentarians.org

43

Test Yourself

Answer Key Baker’s Dozen

Another Baker’s Dozen

from page 39

from page 40

1. Show of Hand 2. Rising 3. Rising Counted 4. Viva Voce (by Voice) 5. Secret Ballot 6. Signed Ballot 7. Roll Call 8. Absentee Ballot 9. Proxy Voting 10. Unanimous Consent 11. Voting Cards 12. Voting Machines 13. E-Mail

All of the “facts” are true except for: 3. The first legislative body in the Americas was indeed formed in 1619 in Virginia but was called the Governor’s Council (upper body) and the House of Burgesses (lower body) 8. Although there are many roads, streets and courts throughout the county with the name Parliament, no city or town by that name was found in any state.

13. This is totally made up.

NAP Connections

In Memoriam

NP commemorates the following members who have passed from our midst; may they rest in peace: • Julia C. Boayue, PRP, Michigan • Paula A. Freeman, California • William D. Martin, District of Columbia • Loretta E. Santagata, RP, New England • Lorraine L. Townsend, District of Columbia 44

National Parliamentarian • Summer 2017

New Registered Parliamentarians

NP congratulates the following individuals for attaining the status of Registered Parliamentarian: • Gregory Oskar Marshall Carlson, Colorado • Barbara J. Cassaday, Missouri • Daniel J. Earheart-Brown, Tennessee • Gerry Roberts Gunn, Virginia • J. Stanton Hill, Georgia • Yongzhong Huang, Utah • Lucy Hamilton Johnson, Minnesota • Cynthia J. Mills, Pennsylvania • Sylvia Rylander, Alaska • Miriam G. Simmons, Minnesota

NAP Connections

NAP makes a splash at the student organizations' parliamentary competitions with a new table banner and NAP brochures. The displays were staffed by Youth Committee members and other NAP volunteers.

NAP members present at the Pennsylvania Future Business Leaders of America (FBLA) Parliamentary contest held in Hershey, PA, on April 4th, 2017 were Diane Brush, MAL, Pennsylvania, Jonathan M. Jacobs, PRP, Delaware Valley Unit, Pennsylvania, Rosemary Seghatoleslami, PRP, District 1 Director, and Lynn "Max" Carlson, MAL, Pennsylvania www.parliamentarians.org

45

Attendees listen intently as Dennis Spillane, RP, discussed “How to Prepare and Run an Effective Meeting” during the San Diego Unit’s fall workshop.

Attendees of the Ohio State Association of Parliamentarians Annual Meeting shared their thoughts on different ways to teach.

Four members of the newly chartered Fredericksburg Parliamentary Unit attended the 60th Annual Virginia State Association of Parliamentarians Convention in Richmond in May. Pictured left to right: Millisa Gary; President Lynda Baer, PRP; Secretary Karen Clemons; and Karen Griffin.

National

Parliamentarian

®

Official publication of the National Association of Parliamentarians® 213 S. Main Street Independence, MO 64050-3808 816.833.3892 • 888.627.2929 hq@nap2.org • www.parliamentarians.org