Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Ratify and Amendments


Sean Hunt

Recommended Posts

Suppose a member wishes to ratify action taken at an inquorate meeting, but only if it is amended in some fashion (say, to remove a rider he does not support). He does not support the original motion without his proffered amendment.

 

He cannot move to amend the action first, since it was never legitimately taken. He does not wish to ratify the action and then move the amendment separately, on the chance that the first succeeds and the second fails.

 

Can he offer both the motion to ratify and to ASPA as a single compound motion?

 

If someone else makes a motion to ratify first, can he attempt to amend it by adding the motion to ASPA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once the motion to ratify has been made, "the entire question is open to debate" - p. 125.  Although the book doesn't say so explicitly (it should, I think  --  RONR/12 anybody?) it seems clear to me that "the entire question" is also up for amendment or any other of the standard parliamentary motions.

 

And there is plenty of white space on p. 125 to add some more words without messing up the subsequent pagination and all our hard won marginal cross references.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can he offer both the motion to ratify and to ASPA as a single compound motion?

 

Not without a motion to Suspend the Rules.

 

Is there a particular reason why the member can't just make the motion he wants to make rather than bothering with all this?

 

If someone else makes a motion to ratify first, can he attempt to amend it by adding the motion to ASPA?

 

Since the motion to Ratify isn't adopted yet, it would be a subsidiary motion to Amend, which is in order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>> He cannot move to amend the action first,

>> since it was never legitimately taken.
 

You don't partially ratify.

 

At an inquorate meeting, nothing was adopted officially in the name of the organization.

So, the member ought to just make the motion in its intended, properly-worded form.

 

You don't want to "cobble together" bits and pieces of a thing which isn't even really adopted.

 

So close to Halloween, you don't want Frankenstein's Motion.

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

At an inquorate meeting, nothing was adopted officially in the name of the organization.

So, the member ought to just make the motion in its intended, properly-worded form.

 

:)

 

Yeah, but....    If the member does that then the folks who previously participated in the inquorate meeting will NOT be off the hook for what ever they did.  And if it involved spending money (and if it was spent) that could be painful.  Quite possibly the person making the motion to ratify (at the current quorate meeting)  is sympathetic to those folks' plight, wants to get them off the hook for the money spent, but is unhappy with some other aspect of the motion adopted inquorately.

 

Since, as noted previously, "the entire question is open[d]..." when the motion to ratify is made, seems proper to allow amendments to the "entire question". 

 

"Ratify" appears to be a bit like "Postpone Indefinitely" (not in all respects, of course) in that the actual motions to ratify and PostIndef are not themselves amendable, but the (main) motion which they address can be amended - pp. 25 & 131 - while PostIndef is pending.  Sort of a leapfrog effect.

 

Perhaps Ratify deserves its own set of SDAMR discussions in a full section of its own - RONR/12 anybody?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Mr. Hunt raises a very interesting question. RONR says that motions to ratify are amendable (on tinted p. 25), and gives one example (on page 125), but there are a number of different situations in which a motion to ratify may be applicable, as shown on pages 124-125, and a question arises as to whether or not a motion to ratify is amendable in all such cases.

 

A motion to ratify action taken at a meeting at which no quorum was present may involve ratification of either the adoption or rejection of a main motion. In either case, the motion to ratify cannot be said to be amendable unless the effect of making such a motion to ratify is to bring before the assembly, for its full consideration, the motion which was either adopted or rejected, in much the same way as motions to Rescind or to Amend Something Previously Adopted bring a question previously adopted again before the assembly. The main difference, of course, is that the motion which was either adopted or rejected at the meeting at which no quorum was present cannot properly be said to have previously been brought before the assembly at all. In order for it to be amended, therefore, the motion to ratify its adoption or rejection must, itself, effectively introduce it for the first time. In other words, there can be no difference in this respect between moving to ratify the adoption or rejection of a main motion at a meeting at which no quorum was present and moving it as an original main motion. If moved in the form of a motion to ratify, however, RONR says that its consideration cannot be objected to. Furthermore, adoption of a motion to ratify may or may not have some sort of retroactive effect, but this is a question Mr. Hunt hasn’t as yet raised.   :mellow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A motion to ratify action taken at a meeting at which no quorum was present may involve ratification of either the adoption or rejection of a main motion. In either case, the motion to ratify cannot be said to be amendable unless the effect of making such a motion to ratify is to bring before the assembly, for its full consideration, the motion which was either adopted or rejected, in much the same way as motions to Rescind or to Amend Something Previously Adopted bring a question previously adopted again before the assembly.

 

What do you mean by "such a motion to ratify"? Are you referring to the motion as made, or as it would stand if amended?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean by "such a motion to ratify"? Are you referring to the motion as made, or as it would stand if amended?

 

I mean the motion to ratify as first made, such as "I move to ratify the action taken at our last meeting in adopting [or 'rejecting'] the motion 'to ... [whatever the motion was] ...', which motion was made and adopted [or 'rejected'] when a quorum was not present."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Mr. Hunt raises a very interesting question. RONR says that motions to ratify are amendable (on tinted p. 25), and gives one example (on page 125), but there are a number of different situations in which a motion to ratify may be applicable, as shown on pages 124-125, and a question arises as to whether or not a motion to ratify is amendable in all such cases.

 

 

Mr. Hunt might also be concerned that even if the motion to Ratify is amendable in his specific case, the assembly may dispose of it before an amendment can be proposed, perhaps by adopting a motion for the previous question. If I were one of those on the ratify hot seat I wouldn't want anyone proposing amendments that might turn up the heat.  It seems he wants one bite at the apple here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean the motion to ratify as first made, such as "I move to ratify the action taken at our last meeting in adopting [or 'rejecting'] the motion 'to ... [whatever the motion was] ...', which motion was made and adopted [or 'rejected'] when a quorum was not present."

 

I understood the question to be whether amendments could be made that would present a different motion from the one that was considered when no quorum was present.

 

For example, suppose a quorum was not present at a meeting when this motion was adopted:

"To solicit 3 bids for fixing the clubhouse roof from qualified contractors and hire the one submitting the lowest bid."

Then, at the next meeting, when a quorum is present, someone moves a motion to ratify:

"To ratify the action taken at our last meeting in adopting the motion 'To solicit 3 bids for fixing the clubhouse roof from qualified contractors and hire the one submitting the lowest bid', which motion was made and adopted when a quorum was not present."

It seems to me that striking out "3" and inserting "4" would not be in order, since if the amendment is adopted, it would leave a main motion pending that contains no rational proposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understood the question to be whether amendments could be made that would present a different motion from the one that was considered when no quorum was present.

 

For example, suppose a quorum was not present at a meeting when this motion was adopted:

"To solicit 3 bids for fixing the clubhouse roof from qualified contractors and hire the one submitting the lowest bid."

Then, at the next meeting, when a quorum is present, someone moves a motion to ratify:

"To ratify the action taken at our last meeting in adopting the motion 'To solicit 3 bids for fixing the clubhouse roof from qualified contractors and hire the one submitting the lowest bid', which motion was made and adopted when a quorum was not present."

It seems to me that striking out "3" and inserting "4" would not be in order, since if the amendment is adopted, it would leave a main motion pending that contains no rational proposition.

 

I agree entirely, which is why I said that the motion to ratify cannot be said to be amendable unless the effect of making such a motion to ratify is to bring before the assembly, for its full consideration, the motion which was either adopted or rejected, so that there will be no difference in this respect between moving to ratify the adoption or rejection of a main motion and moving it as an original main motion.

 

I haven't said that I think this is the case. I am saying that, if this is not the case, I don't see how a motion to ratify either the adoption or rejection of a main motion can be amended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it is amendable in at least some form---a motion to ratify an officer's action can be converted to a motion of censure and vice versa, and one can presumably apply this to a group of members at an inquorate meeting. But I think that Dan has found an excellent way to decompose the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it is amendable in at least some form---a motion to ratify an officer's action can be converted to a motion of censure and vice versa, and one can presumably apply this to a group of members at an inquorate meeting. But I think that Dan has found an excellent way to decompose the problem.

 

Oh, I'm very good at decomposing.   :)

 

If a motion to ratify the adoption or rejection of a main motion brings that motion before the assembly in a way similar to the way in which a motion to Rescind brings the motion proposed to be rescinded again before the assembly, then I think the motion to ratify can be amended by substituting for it a motion to amend the motion proposed to be ratified, in the same way as a motion to Rescind can be amended by substituting for it a motion to amend what is proposed to be rescinded. If not, I don’t see how a motion to ratify the adoption or rejection of a main motion can be amended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, I'm very good at decomposing.   :)

 

If a motion to ratify the adoption or rejection of a main motion brings that motion before the assembly in a way similar to the way in which a motion to Rescind brings the motion proposed to be rescinded again before the assembly, then I think the motion to ratify can be amended by substituting for it a motion to amend the motion proposed to be ratified, in the same way as a motion to Rescind can be amended by substituting for it a motion to amend what is proposed to be rescinded. If not, I don’t see how a motion to ratify the adoption or rejection of a main motion can be amended.

 

Enough decomposing. How about an example? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enough decomposing. How about an example? :)

 

Using yours, after the motion to ratify is moved, move to amend it by substituting for it a motion to amend the motion "To solicit 3 bids for fixing the clubhouse roof from qualified contractors and hire the one submitting the lowest bid" by striking out "3" and inserting "4".

 

Or, how about simply:

 

"I move to substitute for the pending motion a motion to amend the motion which it proposes to ratify by striking out '3' and inserting '4'."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using yours, after the motion to ratify is moved, move to amend it by substituting for it a motion to amend the motion "To solicit 3 bids for fixing the clubhouse roof from qualified contractors and hire the one submitting the lowest bid" by striking out "3" and inserting "4".

 

Or, how about simply:

 

"I move to substitute for the pending motion a motion to amend the motion which it proposes to ratify by striking out '3' and inserting '4'."

 

Interesting. I would not have thought there is any such thing as a motion to Ratify that takes the form of a motion to Amend Something Not Previously Adopted (but Which the Members Assembled Improperly Purported to Adopt at a Meeting When No Quorum Was Present).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. I would not have thought there is any such thing as a motion to Ratify that takes the form of a motion to Amend Something Not Previously Adopted (but Which the Members Assembled Improperly Purported to Adopt at a Meeting When No Quorum Was Present).

 

"I haven't said that I think this is the case. I am saying that, if this is not the case, I don't see how a motion to ratify either the adoption or rejection of a main motion can be amended."

 

(words of wisdom from post #11)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Dan's example is in order.

 

I believe that, absent prior ratification, a motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted applied to a motion at an inquorate meeting is inherently out of order, seeing as that thing was never adopted in the first place.

 

However, once ratified, I believe the motion is in order, as the motion to ratify is tantamount to the assembly declaring "Despite the irregularity in the rules, we have adopted the motion after all." It therefore follows that it can be amended for rescinded as if it had been adopted properly in the first place.

 

Thus, by p. 138 ll. 24-25, it would not be in order to amend a motion to ratify a motion into one to ASPA it.

 

(I will add that this proposed form of ratify mirrors a form of motion I designed for a student organization. The council frequently made policy declarations in the manner of "tuition should be free" and "students should not have to attend classes prior to 11 am", sort of like an ongoing platform. The council desired them to expire after 5 years. When reworking the rules regarding the policies, I created an explicit motion to renew a policy, thus extending its life another 5 years. It then became a question of whether an amendment would renew a policy. It was decided that a motion to "renew and amend" would be permitted, and that motions to renew, renew and amend, amend, or rescind a policy could freely be converted from one form to another)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe that, absent prior ratification, a motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted applied to a motion at an inquorate meeting is inherently out of order, seeing as that thing was never adopted in the first place.

 

I'm quite sure that no one has suggested that a motion to amend a motion which is the subject of a motion to ratify would be a motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted. As noted in post #16, it would, quite obviously, be a motion to amend a motion which has not previously been adopted.

 

The question is whether or not a motion to ratify the adoption of a main motion brings that motion itself before the assembly so that it is open to perfection by subsidiary motions to amend it prior to taking the vote on whether or not to ratify its adoption. I probably muddied the waters by suggesting that this might be done in a manner comparable to the manner in which a motion to Rescind can be converted into a motion to amend that which is proposed to be rescinded, but this is all a necessary part of decomposing.   :) 

 

In any event, RONR tells us that motions to ratify are amendable, and we have been told (in another thread) that  " ... the vote on ratifying the motion to hire the pastor is a vote to hire the pastor. And a vote to ratify the adoption of a special rule of order is a vote to adopt the special rule of order", and if all of this is true it seems that these motions should be open to perfection by subsidiary motions to amend prior to having to take the vote on whether or not to ratify them.  

 

But I gather that they are not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

But I gather that they are not.

 

But they should be, (somewhat) analogous to Postpone Indefinitely, as noted back in posting #5.

 

Ratify also includes the notion of getting the perpetrators of the inquorate motion off the hook for any consequences, like costs, of carrying out the inquorate motion; should we good people at a quorate meeting not have the opportunity to be a bit selective in stating which part(s) of the inquorate motion we actually approve of and which parts we think went too far?  Not "all or nothing", not "take it (ratify it) or leave it (defeat ratify)".  Amendment first allows selective ratification.  A good thing.

 

The clear conclusion of all this debate is that "Ratify" deserves a full section's explication, presumably as an Incidental Motion.  Let's hear it for RONR/12!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they should be, (somewhat) analogous to Postpone Indefinitely, as noted back in posting #5.

 

Well, not really. A main motion must be immediately pending when a motion for its indefinite postponement is made, and any subsequently made motion to amend the pending main motion will take precedence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgive me if this isn't quite on Mr. Hunt's point of concern, but I'm trying to understand this as fully as I can.  Let's say the motion is to ratify several actions taken at a properly called meeting without a quorum present.  One motion is made to ratify all of the actions taken. Is that motion proper?  If it is, is it amendable to strike out one or more of the actions taken, or to move to ratify all of the actions taken "except ______"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgive me if this isn't quite on Mr. Hunt's point of concern, but I'm trying to understand this as fully as I can.  Let's say the motion is to ratify several actions taken at a properly called meeting without a quorum present.  One motion is made to ratify all of the actions taken. Is that motion proper? 

 

 Yes, I would think so.

 

 If it is, is it amendable to strike out one or more of the actions taken, or to move to ratify all of the actions taken "except ______"?

 

I think this can be done provided that the motion to ratify identifies in some way the individual actions to be ratified, either specifically or, in effect, by incorporating them by reference. For example, it might be a motion "to ratify all of the actions taken at the meeting held on September 25, 2015, as set forth in the minutes of that meeting." If so, I think a motion could be made to amend it (for example) by adding the words "except the adoption of the motion to______."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For whatever it is worth, my lowly humble opinion is the same as Mr.  Honemann's.

 

When I first started reading this thread, I was taking the position that ratification is an "all or nothing" proposition.   However, I have been convinced otherwise, and I believe it is perfectly ok for a motion to ratify a previously (improperly) adopted motion to be amended so as to limit just what parts of the prior motion are being ratified. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...