Is the result of a failed motion to approve a disapproval?

[Guest Peter D. Pruyhne]

Greetings,

 

I am currently chair of a technical evaluation sub-committee (TAS), operating under RONR and an explicit procedures document.

 

The relevant procedure excerpt for my question is:

3.1.3 TAS reviews each DM and takes one of the following actions:

A. Approves the DM as submitted.

B. Approves the DM with modifications.

C. Defers the DM to the next meeting.

D. Accepts withdrawal from the submitter and closes the DM.

E. Disapproves the DM with reasons and closes the DM.

F. Refers the DM to another SC.

 

(a DM, data maintenance, is a unit of work for our organization)

 

 

The situation:

 

1) a motion "Move to approve DM #123 as submitted" is made and seconded

2) the motion is discussed and the question called

3) the motion fails

 

 

The controversy:

 

I maintain that a motion was made under section 3.1.3-A, it failed, no action is taken.  In short, a failed approval is no action. 

 

A member of the loyal opposition contends that a failed 3.1.3-A motion is equivalent to a passing 3.1.3-D motion.  In short, a failed approval is a disapproval.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest Peter D. Pruyne]

Correction: the last paragraph should read 3.1.3-E, not 3.1.3-D

[Transpower]

It seems to me that it is 3.1.3-E--the motion is disapproved, reasons cited, and the matter is closed.

[Dan Honemann]

As far as the rules in RONR are concerned, It is incorrect to say that, if a motion fails, no action has been taken. The assembly has made a decision, and this is the action which has been taken.

 

When an assembly rejects a motion, it has expressly decided against doing what the motion proposes be done (RONR, 11th ed., p. 32, ll. 31-34). As a consequence, if an assembly rejects a motion "to approve DM #123 as submitted" it has expressly decided not to approve DM #123 as submitted.

 

The rejection of a motion, however, is not the same thing as taking the action described in your 3.1.3 E, which requires that reasons be given.

[Timothy]

It appears that your procedures don't allow you to disapprove without cause, so even though you've decided not to do A, the other options are still available to you. The DM is still in the state it was before the motion to approve it was made, which appears to be "under review." Consequently, if the meeting ended without taking action, you probably defaulted to "C. Defers the DM to the next meeting."

[jstackpo]

Another fine opportunity to turn to page 588 to see the recipe for how to find out what your rules "really" mean.  And after you do, rewrite them to eliminate the ambiguity.

[Gary c Tesser]

I regretfully have to disagree with Mr Transponder (and I don't think I agree with  Mr Fish that "The DM is still in the state it was before the motion to approve it was made").  Rejecting a motion to approve something is distinctly different from actively disapproving it.  In this instance, the rejection of A intrinsically allows C and F to be possible; and possibly something else.

 

It seems to me that, given "the relevant procedure," which is that the "TAS ... takes one of the following actions:" (A through E), the TAS has to pick one and approve it: it is not sufficient to reject one.  I'm agreeing with Peter (I would prefer, not being among his intimates, to call him Mr Pruyne or Mr Pruyhne, but it's too hard to spell, as he has demonstrated for me), although I emphasize that, since no action was taken, the matter of the DS is not settled for the TAS: it is required to do something, and if the TAS doesn't like A, it has to pick one from B through F (or take another look at A again).

[Timothy]

...(and I don't think I agree with  Mr Fish that "The DM is still in the state it was before the motion to approve it was made").

 

As I see it, there can only be three states:

1. under review
2. approved
3. disapproved

Their procedures allow them to move it from state 1 to either of the other states, or leave it in state 1. Since they didn't approve it, and they didn't vote to disapprove it, it must still be under review.

[Guest Nancy N.]

.... (and I don't think I agree with  Mr Fish that "The DM is still in the state it was before the motion to approve it was made"). 

 

As I see it, there can only be three states:

1. under review
2. approved
3. disapproved

Their procedures allow them to move it from state 1 to either of the other states, or leave it in state 1. Since they didn't approve it, and they didn't vote to disapprove it, it must still be under review.

 

I'm going to reverse myself on what I had thought, reading along,, and disagree with this soi-disant "Gary Tesser" person on this.  Mr. Fish has it right.  For that matter, GcT, thankfully, wasn't quite sure about it either.