[Businessmtg] Business Meeting Chair's Determinations and Suggestions

[Steve Rankin]

Thank you Jerry!

An excellent analysis of the current situation combined with a logical
application of the processes and policies of ASP. 

Hugs,
Steve



-----Original Message-----
From: Businessmtg
[mailto:businessmtg-bounces+steve=serenitysys.com at asp-afg.org] On Behalf Of
Jerry H.
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 9:08 AM
To: Steve - SC
Cc: ASP Business
Subject: [Businessmtg] Business Meeting Chair's Determinations and
Suggestions

Dear Biz-Pals,


As I have stated before, I'm not a fan of Robert's Rules (RR), but they do
create structure and ASP policy does permit a chairperson to switch from
KBDM to RR's at their discretion in some circumstances. This email will
attempt to state my positions as the now-acting chair of this Business
Meeting (BM) and my reasons for them. Please note that where I end up is
very close to our current state of near-agreement. However, getting there is
a trip down Robert's Rules lane. Please be patient...

- - - - -


Robert's Rules (RR) are intended for use in decision-making bodies where all
participants are in the same room. In order to participate one must be
present within the body. Absentee and proxy actions are not entertained. One
must act in the presence of the body. Al-Anon, in my service experience,
follows this practice. 


The former chair of this BM received, privately, a suggested motion which
was then relayed to the BM by the chair:


"That the current ASP member website asp-afg.org/members be accepted as is
by the Business Meeting and be the basis for all future changes [+
requirement of BM approval of those changes (housekeeping changes
excepted.)]"


~ It is the determination of this chair that according to RR this motion was
not properly made. The motioner did not make the motion directly within the
Business Meeting and the chair does not make motions therefor the above
motion is not on the table.


In order to salvage what progress we as a body had made I proposed possible
language intended to unite us. During the discussions which followed a
motion was made and was seconded as follows:


Motion (#15?):

"The ASP website, as currently posted, be temporarily accepted while the
Steering Committee, the Business Committee and/or other created committees
carefully review the differences between the "old" group conscience approved
web content and the "new" posted content for future deliberations on final
content"

[Note: The term "Business Committee" was used in error, the intention being
"Business Meeting."]


~ It is the determination of the chair that Motion (#15?) was properly made,
seconded, and is open for discussion according to Robert's Rules.


XXXXXXXXXXX

The chair now returns this Business Committee to Knowledge Based Decision
Making as defined by ASP Policy.

XXXXXXXXXXX


XXXXXXXXXXX

The chair suggests that someone make a motion no later than Sunday, October
29th "To postpone discussion of Motion (#15?) to a certain time", the chair
suggesting that the time be "...to the December Business Meeting." Second
needed. [I think we could all use a little breather.]

XXXXXXXXXXX


Chair's Note:

Robert's Rules would have required a second and a simple majority vote to
pass this or any motion. I don't know how ASP can function effectively under
the full requirements of RRs because of the time it takes ASP to officially
vote. My former suggestion that we use the Straw Poll option as a substitute
for a speedy voice vote wasn't so speedy. Whether using a straw poll was
even proper here is highly debatable according to the wording and intent of
the motion which formed our use of straw polls. Never-the-less it became
abundantly clear that we had a consensus in favor of Jane's request to
withdraw her proposed motion and her support of a new motion much like
Motion (#15?), (lots of "I agrees").


Since:

A. The chair had imposed Robert's Rules of Order on the Business Meeting.

B. The chair's "proxy" presentation of Jane's original motion was not proper
under RR.

C. A properly presented motion was made and seconded [Motion (#15?)].

D. Jane's request for permission to withdraw her motion was moot.

E. However, in the straw poll responses we did discover a large consensus
(not unanimous) in agreement with withdrawing that motion anyway and for a
replacement motion's language which was very similar to the current motion
on the floor (excepting her addition of language specifying that the BM
would approve any future changes; which is redundant since this is covered
in existing ASP Policy under Motion #4 - that the BM forms the group
conscience of ASP)...


...I propose we pick up discussion of Motion (#15?) again in December, get
to a vote, and begin the process of addressing how we're going to review our
website content.


Please, everyone, it is important that in all discussions that we "Presume
Good Will" and stick to Principles, not personalities.


Thank you, gracias, danke,


Jerry H.

10.24.2017

-




     



 

 

 
_______________________________________________
The ASP Instruction page is http://asp-afg.org/members/asp-instructions/

The ASP web site for ASP members is http://www.asp-afg.org/Members/

For assistance with other ASP issues, contact the List Administrator, at
list_administrator at asp-afg.org

_______________________________________________
Businessmtg mailing list
Businessmtg at asp-afg.org
http://www.asp-afg.org/mailman/listinfo/businessmtg