Proposed update to the RA meeting procedures July 20th, 2016

Closed forum for all Representative Assembly members. Everybody is allowed to see government in action, but posting and replying is restricted to RA members only.

Moderator: SC Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Han Held
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 690
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 3:52 pm
Contact:

Proposed update to the RA meeting procedures July 20th, 2016

Post by Han Held »

I hope y'all have read the notecard which Em Warden has passed around. Her and I had a brief discussion a short while ago about the meeting procedures; specifically about minimum and maximum time limits per agenda item.

I'm not going to speak for her, but my understanding is that those limits exist for three reasons:
1)To make sure each item gets enough time for discussion
2)To curb against people being silenced and not having their say
3)To prevent people from "filibustering", which means talking on and on about an item to run down the clock as a means of stifling debate (ie I talk for 24 hours about item "A" so that the RA is too tired/time runs out to talk about item "B").

The time limits for agenda items are outlined in the RA Rules of Procedure items 2b and 2c, which I'll quote below:

B. [Time limits for each agenda item]

Each item on the agenda shall be allocated a time for debate by the LRA. If the LRA believes that a proposed piece of legislation shall not be controversial, it shall be allocated not less than 10 minutes for debate. If the LRA believes that a proposed piece of legislation may be controversial, it shall be allocated not less than 15 minutes for debate. All members of the RA and all citizens in attendance at the RA shall indicate to the LRA, before the start of the RA session or during the first ten minutes of the session, whether they wish to speak on an item on the agenda, and which side they wish to speak on.
C. [RA decision on an action item after debate closes]

Following the allocated time for debate, the RA shall either move to vote on the issue; move for further debate; or move to allow amendments and further debate. If the RA wishes further debate or amendments, no vote shall be held, and the matter shall be tabled until the next session of the RA, at which time the matter shall be considered as a “prior matter of the RA” on the agenda, and shall be considered to be controversial for the purpose of setting time for debate. If the RA has voted to allow amendments, the matter shall be tabled and amendments shall be drafted and submitted to the LRA and posted on the forums at least one day prior to the date on which the LRA is to publish the RA agenda.

This language is difficult for non-professional citizen legislators (like myself) and some non-english people to understand -it is byzantine and baroque and could benefit from being simplified into "plain english".

Also I believe that in normal meetings the RA should be allowed lee-way to "breeze through" items everyone agrees upon without being required to discuss them for a set, minimum amount of time.

That said, people with unpopular items need to be allowed to speak and have their items fairly considered; and we have to make sure that people can't shutdown proceedings by "running out the clock".

After talking with Em and reading her proposal I've written what I suggest as an alternative which would merge items 2b and 2c into a new 2b. It simplifies the procedure while still addressing the problems.

I would like us to discuss it on the 30th and if possible vote to pass it.

here is my proposed 2b:

2B. [Time limits for each agenda item]

Under normal circumstances, the RA should be allowed to take as much or as little time to discuss items listed on the agenda as the RA feels to be appropriate. However, If a member of the RA believes that an item they want to discuss is being cut short, they may call for the item to be designated as "controversial". Once an item is declared to be "controversial" the LRA (or Pro Tempre if the LRA is absent) will be obligated to allow a minimum of 15 minutes to discuss, debate -and if applicable- vote on the item in question. After 15 minutes the LRA (or PT if LRA is absent) may automatically move that the controversial item be tabled until the next meeting if no resolution has been reached, or if they believe that further conversation during that meeting will be unproductive or disruptive.

If the LRA tables a controversial item, they will be obligated to add it to the following meeting's agenda as a controversial item, where it will be allowed 15 minutes for debate and possibly voted upon. This process shall be repeated until consensus on the issue is reached, or until the RA's term ends.

Em started the ball rolling, but since I (re-)wrote that from scratch any mistakes or misunderstandings are mine.

I have sent you all a copy of the notecard that Em has sent us as a reminder. I'll leave it up to her whether to post it in this thread or not.

I've asked for Ranma to add this to next week's agenda, and she's agreed. I'm not sure if we'll be able to vote on it or not, however.

It would be easiest to keep track of the conversation if we have it here, so I've made this thread to discuss the proposal in. I'll be checking in and answering questions, I hope that Em will too (particularly if I've misunderstood/misconstrued/fucked up any of the points we discussed).

---
"I could talk talk talk, talk myself to death
But I believe I would only waste my breath" -Roxy Music "Remake, remodel"
Post Reply

Return to “Representative Assembly Discussion”