Board of Directors Meeting Thursday, May 29, 2025

Oh and the board members should also be limited to 3 minutes rebuttal time as well.

 

Commercial insurance is a different animal than personal. There aren't a lot of carriers that insure our specialized market and so a very limited amount of carriers to choose from in our case and also SCW.

 

Yes, I realize that I could have put all of this in just one post. All apologies, lol.
Enjoy your Saturday and pray for rain!

 

As Einstein may have said "if you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." A one-minute prepared statement can cover just about anything.

 

What does the RCSC 3-minute limit look like?
It can be done effectively.The key is to be concise and impactful, focusing on a core message.

A 3-minute presentation typically contains between 360 and 480 words, assuming an average speaking rate of 120 to 160 words per minute. More precisely, if you speak at around 140 words per minute, your presentation would be about 420 words.

Tips for planning:
• Time Practice: Record yourself and time how long it takes to deliver your practice presentation.
• Adjust Content: Trim or add content as needed to fit within the allotted time.
• Use a Speech Time Calculator:
https://easywordcount.com/

• What a 420-word speech looks like, example:
"Good morning, everyone. Today, I want to talk about the beautiful and important space we have in our community – Marley Park in Surprise, Arizona. This park isn't just a place to play; it's a vital part of our town's fabric, offering something for everyone.

Marley Park boasts lush green spaces, perfect for picnics and leisurely walks. The park also features a beautiful, wide open area ideal for sports and games. The park's vibrant flowers and trees create a tranquil atmosphere, providing a welcome escape from the hustle and bustle of daily life.

Beyond its natural beauty, Marley Park is equipped with a variety of recreational facilities. There's a playground area for children, a skate park for teens, and walking trails for all ages. The park also has designated areas for sports, making it a convenient and accessible location for local teams and events.

Marley Park plays a crucial role in fostering community connections and promoting healthy lifestyles. It provides a space for families to come together, children to play, and residents to enjoy the outdoors. By investing in parks like Marley, we invest in the well-being of our community.

In conclusion, Marley Park is a treasure that we should cherish and protect. Let's continue to support initiatives that enhance and preserve this wonderful space for generations to come. Thank you."

 

Emily, which is why I followed up my comment about if things become heated. The reality is that we need a well balanced Parliamentarian at every meeting. Someone who knows the rules of order and conduct. I personally take it as an affront that in order to have my say as a member, I have to rotate to the back of the line to speak. To not be allowed to address the BOD, as a member, and have the ability to complete my thoughts and requests without getting back into a line is disrespectful to the members. Which is precisely why I don’t bring my ideas and suggestions, because I deserve to be allowed to speak and present my thoughts and ideas without interference and with respect for the time I spent putting together my recommendations and thoughts. Limitations on the members ability to speak, then treated like a child and told to go to the back of the line and try again is insulting. I truly suspect this is a big factor as to why more people don’t come to share ideas, they feel why bother. That’s why I don’t come, why bother being treated like a second class citizen and be relegated to the back of the line. Why do we not have dialogue rather than “comments”?

I have made numerous comments and suggestions as to how to improve member outreach. I have made numerous suggestions on this site in regards to training, something I am keenly familiar with, and yes, I have ideas, but I will not be placed in a position of round robin storytelling in order to present my ideas. So, I feel there are many others who feel the same way. In the end, it’s the members and the RCSC’s loss that such great knowledge isn’t shared due to lack of open communication. Go ahead and keep your timer and see how well the ideas turn into action items. Stifling the members is one more top down way to prevent member participation. In my opinion.

 

To the comments posted above, thank you for sharing. And once again my ideas for bringing in training, member outreach plans as well as other suggestions for the RCSC organization will stay with me, quietly. I know how to do presentations, I used to do it for a living, and to offer a clear, concise picture of what is needed, established timelines for a project to come to fruition, and demonstrate expectations for each project takes more than three minutes.

 

Purpose of speaking time limits
Speaking time limits are intended to keep meeting discussions focused and maximise participation. They ensure that order is maintained and the proceedings run on schedule.

Time limits also promote fairness by preventing a single member from monopolizing the available discussion time. This way, dominant personalities cannot overshadow quieter members.

RCSC has formally adopted Robert’s Rules of Order as its parliamentary authority.

Has it included the 3-minute rule in the bylaws and adopted as meeting etiquette to guide all open proceedings, The Exchange and board meetings?

What does FYI, our resident Robert’s Rules of Order expert say?? Thanks, in advance, for your advice.

 

If not for the permission granted in the bylaws that allow Members to comment only on motions listed on the agenda, any parliamentarian will tell you that, as a guest, you have no right to speak at all because you are not a member of that assembly.

 

Thanks, FYI. There is no RCSC bylaw mandating a 3-minute time limit, correct?

 

As far as I know, there is no written rule limiting time.

They seem to make-up rules as they go as we now have a ticket machine like the one at the deli counter, and who remembers the bell at the back table?

 

Thanks! I found nothing in our Bylaws or Board Policies, that’s why I asked you!
Could a member, eligible to comment, call for a point of order when they’re cut off after the 3-minute limit is called, to extend their right to speak longer?

 

I would think not! The only permission you were granted was to speak for 3 minutes.

I think if you were to call a point of order it would simply be ignored by the chair because, once again, you are not a member of that assembly and that would exceed your permissible involvement in a meeting of the board.

Just my opinion!

 

EM, I was an underwriter of corporate surety bonds (look it up) which is insurance but it’s not insurance. It would take a few minutes to explain. I did have to learn regular insurance as I also underwrote coverages for financial institutions.

Suretyship goes back at least 5,000 years as it is mentioned in the book of Genesis.

 

Correct me if i'm wrong Tom, but the RCSC can write bylaws that supersede Robert's Rules of Order and the point of them being utilized is when the bylaws are silent on an issue. The whole point of the reference to them is to clarify what should happen in that silence.

 

I would suggest that you are half right!

If there's a rule in Robert's Rules that you don't like, you can write a Special Rule of Order that supersedes Robert's Rules and applies to all future meetings. As an example, Robert's Rules allows each Member to speak during debate twice for 10 minutes each time on each new motion. You would need to adopt a Special Rule of Order to change any of those parameters, like speaking as many time as you want but only for 3 minutes each time.

I would say that if there is no rule in the bylaws about a certain issue that may have arisen, I would say you need to go to the state statutes first. If the particular issue is not addressed in the statutes, then you can go to Robert's Rules.

 

So, the Robert’s Rules refers to debate on a motion to the time limit set at 10 minutes and no more than twice per speaker. This sounds like a reference to a motion, but what does Robert’s Rules state as to open discussion where a motion is not an issue, but rather discussion from the floor on any given topic?

 

Not sure what you're referring to when you say "discussions from the floor" but I assume you're referring to discussions between Directors and Members?

That's a tough question and something I've been concerned with. Technically, once the motion is read by the Chair or the Maker, the motion no longer belongs to the Maker, it now belongs to the assembly (the Board of Directors) where typically debate on the motion by the Directors begins.

There are six stages to a motion:

1 Make Motion

2 Seconding the Motion

3 Chair states the Motion – Motion no longer belongs to the maker

4 Members Debate the Motion

5 Chair puts the Motion to a vote

6 Announcement of Results of Vote


At that point, by allowing Members to comment once the motion has been stated, one could suggest that they are now participating in debate, which is not allowed because they are not members of that assembly.

I know it's a sticky issue. How do you allow the Members to comment if they don't first hear what the motion is? But I guess that's the way it has too be?

As far as discussion by the Director's goes; I would say that they are operating under Procedures in Small Boards meaning they function under a much looser set of guidelines.

"49:21 Procedure in Small Boards. In a board meeting where there are not more than about a dozen members present, some of the formality that is necessary in a large assembly would hinder business. The rules governing such meetings are different from the rules that hold in other assemblies, in the following respects:

1) Members may raise a hand instead of standing when seeking to obtain the floor, and may remain seated while making motions or speaking.

2) Motions need not be seconded.

3) There is no limit to the number of times a member can speak to a debatable question. Appeals, however, are debatable under the regular rules—that is, each member (except the chair) can speak only once in debate on them, while the chair may speak twice.

4) Informal discussion of a subject is permitted while no motion is pending.

5) When a proposal is perfectly clear to all present, a vote can be taken without a motion’s having been introduced. Unless agreed to by unanimous consent, however, all proposed actions must be approved by vote under the same rules as in larger meetings, except that a vote can be taken initially by a show of hands, which is often a better method in small meetings.

6) The chairman need not rise while putting questions to a vote.

7) If the chairman is a member, he may, without leaving the chair, speak in informal discussions and in debate, and vote on all questions."

I know that doesn't really answer your question regarding a dialog between a Director and Member, but remember, the Board no longer wishes to get into a dialog. They have instructed Members to state all their comments and questions within their 3 minute time limit and the Board will respond at the end of your time.

 

In reading the Arizona Revised Statutes, Article10-3701, it states that meetings have to have a 10 day notice period prior to the meeting date. Nothing is referenced to any kind of time limit placed on a speaker at any time during any meeting.
10-3701. Annual and regular meetings; exceptions

A. Unless otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation or bylaws, a corporation with members shall hold a membership meeting annually at a time stated in or fixed in accordance with the bylaws.

B. A corporation with members may hold regular membership meetings at the times stated in or fixed in accordance with the bylaws.

C. A corporation may hold annual and regular membership meetings in or out of this state at the place stated in or fixed in accordance with the bylaws. If no place is stated in or fixed in accordance with the bylaws, the corporation shall hold annual and regular meetings at the corporation's principal office.

D. At regular meetings the members shall consider and act on any matter raised and that is consistent with the notice requirements of section 10-3705.

E. The failure to hold an annual or regular meeting at a time stated in or fixed in accordance with a corporation's bylaws does not affect the validity of any corporate action.

F. Notwithstanding this chapter, a condominium association shall comply with title 33, chapter 9 and a planned community association shall comply with title 33, chapter 16 to the extent that this chapter is inconsistent with title 33, chapters 9 and 16.
The items bolded note that members shall act on any matter raised, meaning members have the ability to raise whatever topic the member chooses as noted as “any topic chosen”. Nowhere in the ARS are time limits established for members to speak.

 

Being that the ARS are basically silent on any rules governing debate, I would say that the following statute applies. I would also say that it probably applies to John's concern about the RCSC having specific qualifications to serve as a Director?

10-3206. Bylaws

A. The board of directors of a corporation shall adopt initial bylaws for the corporation.

B. The bylaws of a corporation may contain any provision for regulating and managing the affairs of the corporation that is not inconsistent with law or the articles of incorporation.