Are You Handling Your Consent Calendar Right?

The Consent Calendar

A recent trend, particularly among governmental bodies and REALTOR® organizations, is to include a category of business on the agenda known as the Consent Calendar or Consent Agenda (or sometimes called a Unanimous Consent Agenda). The purpose of this category, which is often near the beginning of the meeting, is to handle all noncontroversial items at one time.

For instance, a Consent Calendar heading might be placed in the order of business near the beginning of the meeting and include on it the approval of the minutes. Other routine, administrative matters that are approved at each meeting might also be included. When you reach that category on the agenda, the chair would state, “You will see four items on the Consent Agenda: A, B, C, and D. Is there any objection to approving all items on the Consent Agenda?” If there is no objection, all four items on the Consent Agenda are approved together.

On the other hand, if a member wishes to discuss or objects to one item, the chair would state: “Item C is objected to. Is there any objection to approving the other items on the Consent Agenda: A, B, and D? Hearing no objection, A, B, and D are approved. Item C will be considered later in the meeting.” Like any motion for unanimous consent, the purpose of a Consent Calendar is to quickly move through noncontroversial items so that there will be more time for controversial items.

Consent Calendars get mishandled in two ways:

  1. Don’t allow questions or discussion of individual items. If attention is needed on a particular item, it should be pulled from the Consent Calendar and dealt with separately. Then, the remaining items can be approved “without objection.”
  2. A voice or hands vote isn’t needed on the Consent Calendar. If no one has questions or issues with any of the items, unanimous consent (“Is there any objection to approving the items on the Consent Calendar?”) can be used. If members are voting “no” due to specific items, those items should have been pulled for separate discussion.

Should Financial Reports Be on the Consent Calendar?

Standard or monthly financial reports are sometimes included on the Consent Calendar, but they almost certainly shouldn’t be. That’s because the Consent Calendar ADOPTS the items on the Consent Calendar. If financial reports are on there, they are being adopted as well. 

Typical monthly financial reports should not be adopted (but consult your legal counsel). Here’s the language from Robert’s Rules of Order Fast Track:

A standard financial report is the best example of a report that should not be automatically adopted. Associations everywhere hear the treasurer give a financial report and then move to Adopt the treasurer’s report. Robert’s says you shouldn’t do that. After all, we don’t have the slightest idea if any of the bank amounts are accurate. Or even truthful. For all we know, our vote is the equivalent of “Yes, you’re robbing us blind, but why don’t we go ahead and approve whatever you just said.” Robert’s goes so far as to provide: “No action of acceptance by the assembly is required-or proper-on a financial report of the treasurer unless it is of sufficient importance, as an annual report, to be referred to auditors.” The auditors’ report is what should later be adopted by the body.

Might not seem a big deal, but we’ve had several clients that faced major issues of embezzlement (sometimes in the hundreds of thousands of dollars). A question that was asked in efforts to assign blame and responsibility by insurance carriers, law enforcement, and association members was why the board had for so long considered and approved by vote the financials at every meeting. Was it because the board was (a) complicit in the embezzlement?, or (b) paying no attention? 

I’ve occasionally seen the financials on the consent agenda with additional words such as “For Information Only,” but if they are for information only, they should not be on the consent agenda that is being adopted. The best solution is that the financial reports be removed from the consent agenda and any Q&A handled quickly separately. That also better allows for questions.


Jim Slaughter is an attorney, Certified Professional Parliamentarian, Professional Registered Parliamentarian, and past President of the American College of Parliamentary Lawyers. He is author of four books on meeting procedure, including two updated for the latest Robert’s Rules: Robert’s Rules of Order Fast Track and Notes and Comments on Robert’s Rules, Fifth Edition. Both books have been selected as “Editor’s Picks” by Publisher’s Weekly. Many free charts and articles on Robert’s and meeting procedure can be found at www.jimslaughter.com.

Parliamentary Law