Parliamentarians in Alabama: Observations and Reflections

I returned Sunday night from five days at the National Association of Parliamentarians (NAP) Training Conference in Birmingham, Alabama.

In this post, I’ll try to answer the questions most asked by friends and family: Why? and What? Why spend time and treasure on this meeting? and What happens there?

The first of these questions has two answers. First, as a credentialed parliamentarian, I need to earn thirty Continuing Education Units (CEUs) every two years, and in this one week I was able to collect twelve of them. Second, the Ohio Association of Parliamentarians expects me to attend as its president.1

So, what happens at the NTC?

Here’s the context. NAP holds its biennial convention in the odd-numbered years and the NTC in the even-numbered years. NAP’s Executive Board and its Educational Foundation hold business meetings at the NTC, but as its name implies, the NTC is primarily about training. The priorities are flipped at the biennial convention: training sessions are offered, but it’s primarily a governance assembly, where elected delegates consider bylaws amendments and elect officers.

This was my first in-person national meeting of parliamentarians, and I anticipate attending the biennial convention in New Orleans next year.

What happened at this NTC?

I’m told that I’ll be able to consult videos of the sessions soon, and that might be a better time to review the sessions I attended; some of their content came faster than I could take notes. But here were some of the most provocative:

  • “You Can’t Always Get What You Want: The Art of the Well-Timed No” provided observations of situations in which a client doesn’t take the parliamentarian’s advice. (Al Gage, NAP’s own parliamentarian)
  • “The Art of War in Deliberative Assemblies: Ethical Strategy and the Protection of the Process” analyzed parliamentary strategy using principles from Sun Tzu’s 5th-century BC The Art of War. (Steven Cook)
  • “Presiding Masterclass” was a double session in which brave volunteers presided over a simulated motion, with the presenters serving both as assembly and analysts. (Justin Pappano and Tim Wynn)
  • “I Hate Your Bylaws – And You Do, Too!” provided some humorous examples of poorly-written bylaws and seriously analyzed what makes good ones. (Daniel E. Seabold, one of the authors of the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order)

Obviously, I attended more sessions, but this gives an idea of the range of topics covered.

So–I don’t spend money or time loosely, but I think both were well-spent. I learned a lot, enjoyed meeting some people I have only seen online, and made some new friends. And I had a chance to visit in person with some Ohio friends: Jackie Compton Bunch, PRP; Mary Remson, PRP; and Susie Wright, PRP.

I am looking forward to New Orleans next year.

Notes:

  1. There is here an unstated “Why”: As a man of some years with two successful careers behind me, why am I pursuing a third, and why in parliamentary law? The answer is beyond the scope of this article. ↩

Pigeon’s Page

A look back and celebration of the life of Lynn Lavezzi, 1948-2026

If you have come to this page, you probably already know that Lynn passed away recently. Although we are devastated by her passing, we have been supported by many friends and relatives. In fact, so many have asked about her obituary and service that we’ve created this page as an online memorial to her.

The following items are here:

Lynn’s death notice identified three important and worthwhile causes. You can use the following links to learn more about them and to donate if you choose.

  • The Church of the Resurrection in Solon, Ohio, has been our parish home for over twenty years. If you are looking for a spiritual home, please know that you would be welcome here.
  • Many organizations seek to help those with FTD. We suggest the Association for Frontotemporal Dementia, which provides a wealth of information about this disorder.
  • Lynn loved and was loved by a series of canine companions. One place that Lynn donated to was the Cleveland Animal Protective League, and plenty of other animal shelters deserve support.

E-meetings: Re-re-re-visited

The COVID-19 pandemic upended our lives in many ways. On a professional level, it forced parliamentarians to learn how to conduct effective electronic meetings. Since the emergency was declared over, we’ve all had to re-learn what used to be normal. Just as that’s true of our schools, our businesses, and our churches, it’s also true of parliamentary practice.

How would you feel if your organization’s contracted parliamentarian for its online annual meeting only had experience with in-person meetings? Or what about the reverse: you are having an in-person meeting, and the parliamentarian only has experience with online meetings? Would you be confident that the parliamentarian will be able to assist competently and confidently?

I suggest that you would not. Parliamentarians should be able to assist confidently with a variety of meeting configurations.

At the North Coast Unit1, “Meetings of the Membership may be conducted by videoconference when the President determines that sufficient reason exists to forgo an in-person meeting or when so directed by a majority of the Executive Board.” Bylaws, XI:2:A. As president, I determined that such reason exists for the January, February, and March meetings of 2023 and 2024, and we held those meetings electronically.

For the other business meetings of 2023 (May, June, September, and October), I did not make that determination, and we met in person. However, we offered an electronic participation option in what has been called a “hybrid” format. (“Hybrid meeting” is not a parliamentary term, but it has been a shorthand way to describe a meeting format which attempts to provide equal access to both in-person and electronic attendees.)

RONR (12th ed.) 9:31 requires that “alternative” meetings must “provide, at a minimum, conditions of opportunity for simultaneous aural communication among all participating members equivalent to those of meetings held in one room or area.” It is this requirement of “equivalency of opportunity” that presents the challenge. I think we’ve been able to do that, but the technological requirements materially change the nature of the meeting so that it is neither electronic nor in-person.2

Therefore, in order to provide experience with the in-person configuration–which, until just a few tears ago, was the only configuration–we will meet in-person at 6:00 on May 20 and June 17 at the Cuyahoga County Public Library’s Maple Heights Branch.

Although these are defined as in-person meetings, for teaching purposes we will make them available electronically with what I am calling a “passive” Zoom link: those using the link will be able to see and hear the live meeting but will not be seen or heard by those within the room. Basically, it’s “streaming video” using Zoom.

  • Since our business meeting (planned for 6:00-6:30) is intended to model good parliamentary procedure, we have invited our members unable to attend in person to follow us on Zoom link starting at 6:00. They will be able to stay on for the education session.
  • We are inviting guests unable to join us in person to follow us on Zoom starting at 6:35 to observe the education session.
  • The videorecordings of the meeting and the workshop will be available to members after the meeting.

The link is here–or use meeting ID 841 4679 1448 and passcode HMRobert.

Notes:

  1. The North Coast Unit is a parliamentary education group affiliated with the National Association of Parliamentarians. Email northcoastparlipro@gmail.com for information. ↩
  2. For the sake of brevity I won’t enumerate those effects here. They have probably been more evident to those attending in person. Basically, we have used two microphones, two cameras, and two computers to provide the remote audience and the in-person audience with sound and video of each other. ↩