Motion Out of Order

[TraderFred]

At a previous meeting, a motion was made and seconded and an abbreviated discussion ensued. The motion was to investigate the sale of a significant real estate asset.. Due to the complex nature of what would be involved, the discussion was postponed to the next meeting. 

 

At the next meeting , the President declared the motion was 'out of order' for the flimsiest of excuses.   None of his reasons  appeared valid under our By-laws or Robert's Rules . He made his announcement under President's Report, not even under Unfinished Business. He closed the matter and would not entertain any discussion or motions. 

 

We default to Robert's Rules. Is it allowable to  first accept a motion at a meeting and then declare it 'out of order' at the next meeting? If not what are the remedies?

Very importantly, what remedie(s) are available when a President acts so arrogantly and ignores the rules? No points of order were raised.

 

The irony of the matter being that he will be appointing a committee to study the disposition of our asset, which would have been what several of us would have proposed in an amendment to the pending motion had it not been declared 'out of order'. We would like our amendment proposing a committee to be voted on as it has several provisions that we feel are important to assure a selection of a non-political committee.

 

 

[Edgar Guest]

Very importantly, what remedie(s) are available when a President acts so arrogantly and ignores the rules?

 

The ruling of the chair can be appealed. A majority vote decides who's "right".

 

For a more permanent "remedy", see FAQ #20.

[Richard Brown]

. . .what remedie(s) are available when a President acts so arrogantly and ignores the rules? No points of order were raised.

If the president made an actual ruling on his own initiative that the motion was out of order, then there was no need to make a point of order and you or any other member could have appealed from the ruling of the chair, as Mr. Guest suggested.

 

I often tell people who are in organizations that aren't correctly following the rules that they need to always have three words right on the tips of their tongues and be ready to instantly spring to their feet and shout, "Point of Order!!!!"   The next most important phrase is "I appeal from the ruling of the chair".    Another one that ranks right up there with the most useful motions to know when in an out of control meeting is, "Parliamentary Inquiry, Mr. Chairman", followed with, "What exactly are we doing right now" or "what, exactly is the ruling that you just made?".   Etc.  Don't hesitate to ask the Chair for the basis of his ruling or to cite the rule in Robert's Rules that he is relying on.  

 

If you snooze, you are probably going to lose.  Inept chairs get away with only what the assembly lets them get away with.

 

Edited to add:  In addition to the link to Frequently Asked Question No 20 that Mr. Guest provided, you might also look at Official Interpretation No 2006-2 re temporarily removing the presiding officer from the chair.   http://www.robertsrules.com/interp_list.html#2006_2