20100109 Late CorrespondenceRosenberg's ,
Parliamentary
Procedures for the 21st
he rules of procedure at meetings
;f should be simple enough for most
people to understand. Unfortunately,
that hasn't always been the case. Virtu-
ally all clubs, associations, boards, coun-
cils and bodies follow a set of rules,
Roberts Rules of Order, which are em-
bodied in a small but complex book.
Virtually no one I know has actually
read this book cover to cover.
Worse yet, the book was written for
another time and purpose. If you are
running the British Parliament, Roberts
Rules of Order is a dandy and quite use-
d handbook. On the other hand, if
you're running a meeting of a five -
member body with a few members of
the public in attendance, a simplified
version of the rules of parliamentary
procedure is in order. Hence, the birth
of "Rosenberg's Rules of Order."
This publication covers the rules of
parliamentary procedure based on my
20 years of experience chairing meetings
in state and local government. These
rules have been simplified and slimmed
down for 21st century meetings, yet
they retain the basic tenets of order to
which we are accustomed.
"Rosenbergs Rules of Order" are sup-
ported by the following four principles:
1. Rules should establish order. The
first purpose of the rules of parlia-
mentary procedure is to establish a
framework for the orderly conduct
of meetings.
2. Rules should be clear. Simple rules
lead to wider understanding and
participation. Complex rules create
two classes: those who understand
and participate and those who do
not filly understand and do not
fully participate.
3. Rules should be user. -friendly. That
is, the rules must be simple enough
that citizens feel they have been able
to participate in the process.
4. Rules should enforce the will of
the majority while protecting the
rights of the minority. The ultimate
purpose of the rules of procedure is
to encourage discussion and to facili-
tate decision-making by the body. In
a democracy, the majority rules. The
rules must enable the majority to
express itself and fashion a result,
while permitting the minority to also
express itself (but not dominate) and
fully participate in the process.
The Chairperson Should Take a
Back Seat During Discussions
While all members of the governing
body should know and understand the
rules of parliamentary procedure, it is
the chairperson (chair) who is charged
with applying the rules of conduct.
The chair should be well versed in those
There are exceptions to the general rule of free
and open debate on motions. The exceptions all
apply when there is a desire to move on.
by Dave Rosenberg
rules, because the chair, for all intents
and purposes, makes the final ruling on
the rules. In fact, all decisions by the
chair are final unless overruled by the
governing body itself.
Because the chair conducts the meeting,
it is common courtesy for the chair to
take a less active role than other mem-
bers of the body in debates and discus-
sions. This does not mean that the chair
should not participate in the debate or
discussion. On the contrary, as a mem-
ber of the body, the chair has full rights
to participate in debates, discussions
and decision-making. The chair should,
however, strive to be the last to speak at
the discussion and debate stage, and
should not make or second a motion
unless he or she is convinced that no
other member of the body will do so.
The Basic Format for an
Agenda Item Discussion
Formal meetings normally have a written,
published agenda; informal meetings
may have only an oral or understood
agenda. In either case, the meeting is
governed by the agenda and the agenda
constitutes the body's agreed-upon road
map for the meeting. And each agenda
item can be handled by the chair in the
following basic format.
First, the chair should clearly announce
the agenda item number and should
clearly state what the subject is. The
chair should then announce the format
that will be followed.
Second, following that agenda format,
the chair should invite the appropriate
people to report on the item, including
any recommendation they might have.
The appropriate person may be the
chair, a member of the governing body,
Rosenbergs Rules of Orden Simple Parliamentary Procedure for the 21st Century
a staff person, or a committee chair
charged with providing information
about the agenda item.
Third, the chair should ask members
of the body if they have any technical
questions for clarification. At thispoint,
members of the governing body may ask
clarifying questions to the people who
reported on the item, and they should
be given time to respond.
Fourth, the chair should invite public
comments or, if appropriate at a formal
meeting, open the meeting to public
input. If numerous members of the pub-
lic indicate a desire to speak to the sub-
ject, the chair may limit the time of each
public speaker. At the conclusion of the
public comments, the chair should ann-
ounce that public input has concluded
(or that the public hearing, as the case
may be, is closed).
Fifth, the chair should invite a motion
from the governing body members. The
chair should announce the name of the
member who makes the motion.
Sixth, the chair should determine if any
member of the body wishes to second
the motion. The chair should announce
the name of the member who seconds
the motion. It is normally good practice
for a motion to require,a second before
proceeding with it, to ensure that it is
not just one member of the body who
is interested in a particular approach.
However, a second is not an absolute
requirement, and the chair can proceed
with consideration and a vote on the
motion even when there is no second.
This is a matter left to the discretion
of the chair.
Seventh, if the motion is made and sec-
onded, the chair should make sure every-
one understands the motion. This is
done in one of three ways:
1. The chair can ask the maker of the
motion to repeat it;
2. The chair can repeat the motion; or
3. The chair can ask the secretary
or the clerk of the body to repeat
the motion.
Eighth, the chair should now invite dis-
cussion of the motion by the members
of the governing body. If there is no
desired discussion or the discussion has
ended, the chair should announce that
the body willvote on the motion. If'
there has been no discussion or a very
brief discussion, the vote should proceed
immediately, and there is no need to re-
peat the motion. If there has been sub-
stantial discussion, it is normally best to
make sure everyone understands the
motion by repeating it.
Motions are made in a simple two-step
process. First, the chair recognizes the
member. Second, the member makes a
motion by preceding the member's
desired approach with the words: "I
move ..."''A typical motion might be:
"I move that we give 10 days' notice in
the future for all our meetings."
The chair usually initiates the motion by:
1. Inviting the members to make a
motion: "A motion at this time
would be in order."
Debate on policy is healthy; debate on personalities
is not. The chair has the right to cut off discussion
that is tea® personal, too lead or toga crude.
Ninth, the chair takes a vote. Simply
asking for the "ayes" and then the "nays"
is normally sufficient. If members of the
body do not vote, then they "abstain."
Unless the rules of the body provide
otherwise or unless a super -majority is
required (as delineated later in these
rules), a simple majority determines
whether the motion passes or is defeated.
Tenth, the chair should announce the
result of the vote and should announce
what action (if any) the body has taken.
In announcing the result, the chair
should indicate the names of the mem-
bers, if any, who voted in the minority
on the motion. This announcement
might take the following form: "The
motion passes by a vote of 3-2, with
Smith and Jones dissenting. We have
passed the motion requiring 10 days'
notice for all future meetings of this
governing body."
Motions in General
Motions are the vehicles for decision-
making. It is usually best to have a mot-
ion before the governing body prior to
discussing an agenda item, to help every-
one focus on the motion before them.
2. Suggesting a motion to the members:
"A motion would be in order that we
give 10 -days' notice in the future for
all our meetings."
3. Making the motion.
As noted, the chair has every right as a
member of the body to make a motion,
but normally should do so only if he or
she wishes a motion to be made but no
other member seems willing to do so.
The Three Basic Motions
Three motions are the most common:
1. The basic motion. The basic motion
is the one that puts forward a deci-
sion for consideration. A basic mot-
ion might be: "I move that we create
a five -member committee to plan
and put on our annual fundraiser."
2. The motion to amend. If a member
wants to change a basic motion that
is under discussion, he or she would
move to amend it. A motion to
amend might be: "I move that we
amend the motion to have a 10 -
member committee." A motion to
amend takes the basic motion that i`
before the body and seeks to change,
it in some way.
3. The substitute motion. If a member
wants to completely do away with
the basic motion under discussion
and put a new motion before the
governing body, he or she would
"move a substitute motion." A substi-
tute motion might be: "I move a sub-
stitute motion that we cancel the
annual fundraiser this year."
Motions to amend and substitute mo-
tions are often confused. But they are
quite different, and so is their effect,
if passed.
A motion to amend seeks to retain the
basic motion on the floor, but to modify
it in some way.
A substitute motion seeks to throw out
the basic motion on the floor and substi-
tute a new and different motion for it.
The decision as to whether a motion is
really a motion to amend or a substitute
motion is left to the chair. So that if a
member makes what that member calls a
motion to amend, but the chair deter-
mines it is really a substitute motion, the
chair's designation governs.
When Multiple Motions Are Before
The Governing Body
Up to three motions may be on the floor
simultaneously. The chair may reject a
fourth motion until the three that are on
the floor have been resolved.
When two or three motions are on the
floor (after motions and seconds) at
the same time, the first vote should be
on the last motion made. So, for exam-
ple, assume the first motion is a basic
"motion to have a five -member commit-
tee to plan and put on our annual fund-
raiser." During the discussion of this
motion, a member might make a second
motion to "amend the main motion to
have a 10 -member committee, not a
five -member committee, to plan and
put on our annual fundraiser." And per-
haps, during that discussion, a member
makes yet a third motion as a "substitute
motion that we not have an annual
rrundraiser this year." The proper proce-
dure would be as follows.
Rosenbergs Rules of Order.• Simple Parliamentary Procedure for the 21st Century
First, the chair would deal with the
third (the last) motion on the floor, the
substitute motion. After discussion and
debate, a vote would be taken first on
the third motion. If the substitute
motion passes, it would be a substitute
for the basic motion and would elimi-
nate it. The first motion would be moot,
as would the second motion (which
sought to amend the first motion), and
the action on the agenda item would be
complete. No vote would be taken on
the first or second motions. On the
other hand, if the substitute motion (the
third motion) failed, the chair would
proceed to consideration of the second
(now the last) motion on the floor, the
motion to amend.
If the substitute motion failed, the
chair would then deal with the second
(now the last) motion on the floor,
the motion to amend. The discussion
and debate would focus strictly on the
amendment (should the committee be
five or 10 members). If the motion to
amend passed, the chair would now
move ,to consider the main motion (the
first motion) as amended. If the motion
to amend failed, the chair would now
move to consider the main motion
(the first motion) in its original format,
not amended.
To Debate or Not to Debate
The basic rule of motions is that they
are subject to discussion and debate.
Accordingly, basic motions, motions to
amend, and substitute motions are all
eligible, each in their turn, for full dis-
cussion before and by the body. The
debate can continue as long as members
of the body wish to discuss an item, sub-
ject to the decision of the chair that it is
time to move on and take action.
There are exceptions to the general rule
of free and open debate on motions. The
exceptions all apply when there is a
desire of the body to move on. The fol-
lowing motions are not debatable (that
is, when the following motions are made
and seconded, the chair must immedi-
ately call for a vote of the body without
debate on the motion):
A motion to adjourn. This motion, if
passed, requires the body to immediately
adjourn to its next regularly scheduled
meeting. This motion requires a simple
majority vote.
A motion to recess. This motion, if
passed, requires the body to immediately
take a recess. Normally, the chair deter-
mines the length of the recess, which
may range from a few minutes to an
hour. It requires a simple majority vote.
The challenge for anyone chairing a public meet-
ing is t0 accommodate public input in a timely
and time -sensitive way, while maintaining steady
progress throng the agenda items.
Third, the chair would now deal with
the first motion that was placed on the
floor. The original motion would either
be in its original format (five -member
committee) or, if amended, would be in
its amended format (10 -member com-
mittee). And the question on the floor
for discussion and decision would be
whether a committee should plan and
put on the annual fundraiser.
A motion to fix the time to adjourn.
This motion, if passed, requires the body
to adjourn the meeting at the specific
time set in the motion. For example, the
motion might be: "I move we adjourn
this meeting at midnight." It requires a
simple majority vote.
A motion to table. This motion, if
passed, requires discussion of the agenda
item to be halted and the agenda item to
Rosenbergs Rules of Order. • Simple Parliamentary Procedure for the 21st Century
be placed on "hold." The motion may
contain a specific time in which the
item can come back to the body: "I
move we table this item until our regu-
lar meeting in October." Or the motion
may contain no specific time for the
return of the item, in which case a
motion to take the item off the table
and bring it back to the body will have
to be taken at a future meeting. A
motion to table an item (or to bring it
back to the body) requires a simple
majority vote.
A motion to limit debate. The most
common form of this motion is to say:
"I move the previous question" or "I
move the question" or "I call for the
question." When a member of the body
makes such a motion, the member is
really saying: "I've had enough debate.
Let's get on with the vote." When such
a motion is made, the chair should ask
for a second to the motion, stop debate,
and vote on the motion to limit debate.
The motion to limit debate requires a
two-thirds vote of the body. Note that a
motion to limit debate could include a
time limit. For example: "I move we
limit debate on this agenda item to
15 minutes." Even in this format, the
If you are running the
Robert's Rules of girder is
useful handbook.
motion to limit debate requires a two-
thirds vote of the body. A similar mot-
ion is a motion to object to consideration
ofan item. This motion is not debatable,
and if passed, precludes the body from
even considering an item on the agenda.
It also requires a two-thirds vote.
Majority and Super -Majority Votes
In a democracy, decisions are made with
a simple majority vote. A tie vote means
the motion fails. So in a seven -member
body, a vote of 4-3 passes the motion. A
vote of 3-3 with one abstention means
the motion fails. If one member is ab-
sent and the vote is 3-3, the motion
still fails.
All motions require a simple majority,
but there are a few exceptions. The
exceptions occur when the body is
taking an action that effectively cuts
off the ability of a minority of the body
to take an action or discuss an item.
These extraordinary motions require a
two-thirds majority (a super -majority)
to pass:
Motion to limit debate. Whether a
member says, "I move the previous
question," "I move the question," "I
call for the question' or "I move to limit
debate," it all amounts to an attempt to
cut off the ability of the minority to dis-
cuss an item, and it requires a two-thirds
vote to pass.
Motion to close nominations. When
choosing officers of the body, such as the
chair, nominations are in order either
from a nominating committee or from
the floor of the body. A motion to close
nominations effectively cuts off the right
of the minority to nominate officers,
and it requires a two-thirds vote
to pass.
ritish Parliament,
a dandy and qyite
Motion to object to the consideration
of a question. Normally, such a motion
is unnecessary, because the objectionable
item can be tabled or defeated straight
UP. However, when members of a body
do not even want an item on the agenda
to be considered, then such a motion
is in order. It is not debatable, and it
requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
Motion to suspend the rules. This
motion is debatable, but requires a two-
thirds vote to pass. If the body has its
own rules of order, conduct or proce-
dure, this motion allows the body to sus-
pend the rules for a particular purpose.
For example, the body (a private club)
might have a rule prohibiting the atten-
dance at meetings by non -club mem-
bers. A motion to suspend the rules
would be in order to allow a non -club
member to attend a meeting of the club
on a particular date or on a particular
agenda item.
The Motion to Reconsider
There is a special and unique motion
that requires a bit of explanation all by
itself the motion to reconsider. A tenet
of parliamentary procedure is finality.
After vigorous discussion, debate and
a vote, there must be some closure to
the issue. And so, after a vote is taken,
the matter is deemed closed, subject
only to reopening if a proper motion
to reconsider is made.
A motion to reconsider requires a
majority vote to pass, but there are
two special rules that apply only to
the motion to reconsider. i
First is the matter of timing..A motion
to reconsider must be made at the meet-
ing where the item was first voted upon
or at the very next meeting of the body.
A motion to reconsider made at a later
time is untimely. (The body, however,
can always vote to suspend the rules
and, by a two-thirds majority, allow a
motion to reconsider to be made at
another time.)
Second, a motion to reconsider may be
made only by certain members of the
body. Accordingly, a motion to recon-
sider may be made only by a member
who voted in the majority on the origi-
nal motion. If such a member has a
change of heart, he or she may make the
motion to reconsider (any other mem-
ber of the body may second the motion).
If a member who voted in the minority
seeks to make the motion to reconsider,
it must be ruled out of order. The pur-
pose of this rule is finality. If a member
of the minority could make a motion to
reconsider, then the item could be
brought back to the body again and
again, which would defeat the purpose
of finality.
If the motion to reconsider passes, then
the original matter is back before the
body, and a new original motion is in
order. The matter may be discussed and
debated as if it were on the floor for the
first time.
Courtesy and Decorum
The rules of order are meant to create
an atmosphere where the members of
the body and the members of the public
can attend to business efficiently, fairly
and with full participation. And at the
same time, it is up to the chair and the
members of the body to maintain com-
mon courtesy and decorum. Unless the
setting is very informal, it is always best
for only one person at a time to have
the floor, and it is always best for every
Rosenbergs Rules of Order. • Simple Parliamentary Procedure for the 21st Century
it is usually best to have a motion before the gov-
erning body -prior to discussing
to help everyone focus
lege relate to anything that would inter-
fere with the normal comfort of the
meeting. For example, the room may
be too hot or too cold, or a blowing
fan might interfere with a persods
ability to hear.
Order. The proper interruption would
be: "Point of order." Again, the chair
would ask the interrupter to "state your
point." Appropriate points of order
:Motions to amend and substitute notions are
often confused. But they are quite different, and
o is their effect, if passed.
speaker to be first recognized by the
chair before proceeding to speak.
The chair should always ensure that
debate and discussion of an agenda item
focus on the item and the policy in ques-
tion, not on the personalities of the
members of the body. Debate on policy
is healthy; debate on personalities is not.
The chair has the right to cut off discus-
sion that is too personal, too loud or
too crude.
Debate and discussion should be fo-
cused, but free and open. In the interest
of time, the chair may, however, limit
the time allotted to speakers, including
members of the body. Can a member of
the body interrupt the speaker? The
general rule is no. There are, however,
exceptions. A speaker may be interrupt-
ed for the following reasons:
Privilege. The proper interruption
would be: "Point of privilege." The chair
` >would then ask the interrupter to "state
your point." Appropriate points of privi-
relate to anything that would not be
considered appropriate conduct of the
meeting, for example, if the chair moved
on to a vote on a motion that permits
debate without allowing that discussion
or debate.
Appeal. If the chair makes a ruling that
a member of the body disagrees with,
that member may appeal the ruling of
the chair. If the motion is seconded and
after debate, if it passes by a simple
majority vote, then the ruling of the
chair is deemed reversed.
Call for orders of the day. This is sim-
ply another way of saying, "Lets return
to the agenda." If a member believes that
the body has drifted from the agreed-
upon agenda, such a call may be made.
It does not require a vote, and when the
chair discovers that the agenda has not
been followed, the chair simply reminds
the body to return to the agenda item
properly before them. If the chair fails
to do so, the chair's determination may
be appealed.
an agenda. item.,
Withdraw a motion. During debate
and discussion of a motion, the maker
of the motion on the floor, at any time,
may interrupt a speaker to withdraw
his or her motion from the floor. The
motion is immediately deemed with-
drawn, although the chair may ask the
person who seconded the motion if
he or she wishes to make the motion,
and any other member may make the
motion if properly recognized.
Special Notes About Public Input
The rules outlined here help make meet-
ings very public -friendly. But in addi-
tion, and particularly for the chair, it is
wise to remember three special rules that
apply to each agenda item:
Rule One: Tell the public what the body::
will be doing.
Rule Two: Keep the public informed
while the body is doing it.
Rule Three: When the body has acted,
tell the public what the body did.
Public input is essential to a healthy
democracy, and community participa-
tion in public meetings is an important
element of that input. The challenge for
anyone chairing a public meeting is to
accommodate public input in a timely
and time -sensitive way, while maintain-
ing steady progress through the agenda
items. The rules presented here for con-
ducting a meeting are offered as tools for
effective leadership and as a means of
developing sound public policy. !;
SKU 1533
$5.00
To order additional copies of this
publication, call (916) 658-8257 or
visit www.cacities.orglstore.
O 2003 League of California Cities.
All rights reserved.
LEj"�
AUE
1400 K Street
f fF"""-
1
OF CALIFORNIA
Sacramento, 95814
%F
/
(916) 658-8200A
Fax (916) 658-8240
www.cacities.o rg
Ethical Decision -Malang Worksheet
Case:
Most relevant facts?
Stakeholders? Persons/groups directly affected by your decision and what they have at stake.
Professional/Fiscal/Political
Issues?
Legal/Policy Issues?
Ethical Issues?
Possible actions? List one or two of the most likely actions you can take, then ask the questions below.
Consequences: Which option
Individual Rights/Fairness:
Core Values: Which option
produces the most good, least harm?
Which option best respects the rights of
advances the City's core values? Your
Advances the common good of the City?
all parties; fulfills duties; treats all
own character? Describe how.
Describe how.
fairly? Describe how.
Final Decision/Priority Standards/Communication Strategy?
20
Dynamics:
Into Groan Zone
00
a R��
d
47
� L1,NfMM
IR ,LMp,a
Sustainable
Agreements
• Participants say, "yes, this works from my
perspective"
• Shared responsibility for
— Keep working to understand goals, needs, fears
— Face and overcome conflicts
— Explore different perspectives
— Separate issues from people
— Search for imaginative solutions
Gradients of Agreement
NMM,
BMWs
PMW
Lltlp,'a
PM•Y
M1et
ON�P
IRwPI,
IAL,ofM1ll[
w
NLPpalln
RLI"R
alrya
�d
MyML7
N�NPMM
•1pNW
q�
•IM•L• •pmt•N.1
•Iti,Ps
Yi,Mro
YEo,"L•
'I••RPy
'I Uontw"a
YKp1 Nf
11•L'
wOI L'
apNYm.'
tlYa,0ut1
B,upeemm
babp
pmpm"'
tlOn[caltb
MEupTe
tnOLWin
Mtptg.0ut
sygaebe,
ULl punt
pmy,.•
Ilxpppt
tle
•"lb Ue
YNONdIin
Ledelon.•
lxgml,pY�
p[•
4p
� L1,NfMM
IR ,LMp,a
Sustainable
Agreements
• Participants say, "yes, this works from my
perspective"
• Shared responsibility for
— Keep working to understand goals, needs, fears
— Face and overcome conflicts
— Explore different perspectives
— Separate issues from people
— Search for imaginative solutions
ML�w,L
•!,
NMM,
BMWs
PMW
Lltlp,'a
PM•Y
M1et
ON�P
IRwPI,
IAL,ofM1ll[
w
NLPpalln
RLI"R
alrya
�d
MyML7
N�NPMM
•1pNW
q�
•IM•L• •pmt•N.1
•Iti,Ps
Yi,Mro
YEo,"L•
'I••RPy
'I Uontw"a
YKp1 Nf
11•L'
wOI L'
apNYm.'
tlYa,0ut1
B,upeemm
babp
pmpm"'
tlOn[caltb
MEupTe
tnOLWin
Mtptg.0ut
sygaebe,
ULl punt
pmy,.•
Ilxpppt
tle
•"lb Ue
YNONdIin
Ledelon.•
lxgml,pY�
p[•
as
1
4 Should Edwards Buy?
• The Case of Pedia Nu -Tech
4 Participant Rights
Each person has the right to:
• Express his or her beliefs, ideas, and
feelings
• Define himself/herself without being
labeled by others
• Ask questions that help him/her
understand what someone is saying
• Not change or be forced to change
Participant
t Responsibilities
• Listen to others patiently and without
judgment
• Separate the issues from the person
• Answer questions in ways that help others
understand him or her
• Grant basic respect to others even in conflict
or disagreement
• Be continually present and attentive to the
process
so
51
52
F�
RANCHO PALOS VERDES PUBLIC TRUST PROGRAM
ESTABLISHING A COUNCIL OF TRUST
Vision, Skills, and Strategies for the RPV City Council 'At Its Best'
January 9, 2010
9:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.
Public trust is the public's confident reliance that their City government works at all times,
in public and in private, only for the best interests of all resident. Role -model leadership
from the top is the single -most important factor in the success of any public trust program.
9:30-9:50 a.m. WELCOME, GROUND -RULES, WORKSHOP GOALS, WARM-UP EXERCISE
"Campaigns conducted in this positive way allow a newly -seated Council to immediately move to
developing a shared vision of a "Council of Trust " outside of elections. The Council can move
expeditiously to pro -active team building..." RPV Public Trust Program Proposal
Dr. Shanks' summarizes what he heard from Council and Staff during phone interviews
9:50-10:05 a.m. COUNCIL REVIEW OF CAMPAIGN PROGRAM
Review candidate feedback. Council and Staff feedback and discussion about campaign program.
10:05 BUILDING AN EFFECTIVE COUNCIL -STAFF TEAM
a. Clarify Council and Staff roles
b. Effective Council -Staff communication practices and procedures
c. Core Values for Council -Staff relationships and what those values look like in practice
11:00 PROCEDURES AND METHODS FOR EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE PUBLIC MEETINGS
a. Review Rosenberg Rules
b. Interacting with the public
c. Practice decision-making: Efficient meetings
d. Review and Adjustments
e. Core Values for effective and efficient meetings and what those values look like in practice
12:00 NEW METHODS FOR CONSENSUS -BUILDING AND ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING
a. When is consensus desirable
b. How to reach consensus: methods and practice
c. Criteria for ethical and sustainable decision-making
d. Core values for decision-making and what those look like in practice
12:40 DECISIONS GOING FORWARD
WARM-UP EXERCISE: WHAT DO I BRING?
a. What do I contribute uniquely to the conduct of Council business?
b. What behavior do I sometimes exhibit that may get in the way of the Council's business?
c. What is my greatest hope for this team?
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PUBLIC TRUST PROGRAM
POST NOVEMBER 2009 ELECTION FEEDBACK SESSION
SESSION WORKSHEET
Use this sheet for your notes, to record comments as you listen to candidates and others, and to
submit comments on these topics to Dr. Shanks. You are invited to turn this sheet in for inclusion of
your ideas in the summary minutes that Dr. Shanks will prepare.
What campaign behaviors or other actions built public trust during Election 2009? In column A,
please give one or two brief examples of candidates, campaigns, City officials, City staff, or others acting at
their best to do the right thing, keep campaign promises, advance public trust, etc., during this election. In
column B, identify any City action, program component, person or anything else that may have supported
or encouraged that behavior. If none, please write "none."
A.
AT
OUR
BEST
EXAMPLES
B.SUPPORTED
OR ENCOURAGED
BY
2. What is your vision for campaigns and public trust during Election 2011?. In column A, if you saw
something wrong in 2009 or had an issue or concern, please write it down as a positive goal that the City
should strive to accomplish in 2011. For example, if you believe a candidate did not tell the truth about him
or herself, you might write, "Get all candidates to give honest and complete information about themselves."
Use column B to suggest practical ways the City could
A. GOAL FOR 2010
accomplish that goal.
B. PROGRAM COM
If you choose to turn this page in at the end of the session, please cross off anything you do not want
Dr. Shanks to include in the summary notes. On the back of this page, please add any other comments
you wish to make. Note that Dr. Shanks will include issues and concerns you raise, but will not
include specific candidate names in the summary notes. Signatures are optional.
From The Leadership Challenge by Barry Posner and Jim Kouzes
The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership
Beyond the horizon of time is a changed world, very different from today's world. Some people see
beyond that horizon and into the future. They believe that dreams can become reality. They open our
eyes and lift our spirits. They build trust and strengthen our relationships. They stand firm against the
winds of resistance and give us the courage to continue the quest. We call these people leaders.
In their study, Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner set out to discover what it took to become one of these
leaders. They wanted to know the common practices of ordinary men and women when they were at
their leadership best—when they were able to take people to places they'd never been before. Their
analysis of thousands of cases and surveys revealed The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership:
Inspire a Shared Vision
Leaders passionately believe that they can make a difference. They
envision the future, creating an ideal and unique image of what the
` organization can become. Through their magnetism and quiet persuasion,
leaders enlist others in their dreams. They breathe life into their visions
INSPIRING and get people to see exciting possibilities for the future.
a Shared Vision
ao` Challenge the Process
Leaders search for opportunities to change the status quo. They look for
innovative ways to improve the organization. In doing so, they experiment
and take risks. And because leaders know that risk taking involves
CHALLENGING mistakes and failures, they accept the inevitable disappointments as
the Process learning opportunities.
Enable Others to Act
Leaders foster collaboration and build spirited teams. They actively involve
jy`-,► �j 1 others. Leaders understand that mutual respect is what sustains
extraordinary efforts; they strive to create an atmosphere of trust and
N N human dignity. They strengthen others, making each person feel capable
to Act and powerful.
Model the Way
Leaders establish principles concerning the way people (constituents,
peers, colleagues, and customers alike) should be treated and the way
goals should be pursued. They create standards of excellence and then
%
set an example for others to follow. Because the prospect of complex
change can overwhelm people and stifle action, they set interim goals so
MODELING
that people can achieve small wins as they work toward larger objectives.
They unravel bureaucracy when it impedes action; they put up signposts
the Way
when people are unsure of where to go or how to get there; and they
create opportunities for victory.
Inspire a Shared Vision
Leaders passionately believe that they can make a difference. They
envision the future, creating an ideal and unique image of what the
` organization can become. Through their magnetism and quiet persuasion,
leaders enlist others in their dreams. They breathe life into their visions
INSPIRING and get people to see exciting possibilities for the future.
a Shared Vision
ao` Challenge the Process
Leaders search for opportunities to change the status quo. They look for
innovative ways to improve the organization. In doing so, they experiment
and take risks. And because leaders know that risk taking involves
CHALLENGING mistakes and failures, they accept the inevitable disappointments as
the Process learning opportunities.
Enable Others to Act
Leaders foster collaboration and build spirited teams. They actively involve
jy`-,► �j 1 others. Leaders understand that mutual respect is what sustains
extraordinary efforts; they strive to create an atmosphere of trust and
N N human dignity. They strengthen others, making each person feel capable
to Act and powerful.
WHAT DO THESE SKILLS HAVE TO DO WITH ETHICS?
TRY TRANSLATING SOME OF THE ABOVE SENTENCES INTO SPECIFIC BEHAVIORS YOU CAN DO NOW IN YOUR JOB.,
Encourage the Heart
Accomplishing extraordinary things in organizations is hard work. To keep
hope and determination alive, leaders recognize contributions that
%
individuals make. In every winning team, the members need to share in
the rewards of their efforts, so leaders celebrate accomplishments. They
ENCOURAGING
make people feel like heroes.
the Heart
WHAT DO THESE SKILLS HAVE TO DO WITH ETHICS?
TRY TRANSLATING SOME OF THE ABOVE SENTENCES INTO SPECIFIC BEHAVIORS YOU CAN DO NOW IN YOUR JOB.,
Values as Standards of Conduct
Value/ Looks like Doesn't look like
Value Definition these good behaviors these bad behaviors