Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

rescind a motion based on inaccurate information


Guest Robert

Recommended Posts

 

Can a motion which has been seconded and passed be rescinded or reconsidered at the next monthly meeting when it is discovered the motion was made based on an inaccurate interpretation of the organizations by-laws? If so would the proper format be  a motion to reconsider or rescind the motion is question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It can be rescinded or amended, but it is too late to reconsider it.  A motion to reconsider can be made only on the same day that the motion was originally adopted, except in sessions lasting more than one day.

Just move to rescind the motion.  It requires a majority vote if previous notice is given.  Otherwise, without previous notice, it requires a two thirds vote or the vote of a majority of the entire membership.

See pages 305-310 of RONR for the motion Rescind or amend something previously adopted. See pages 315-332 for the motion Reconsider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Guest Robert said:

. . . when it is discovered the motion was made

based on an inaccurate interpretation of the organizations bylaws?

The parliamentary rules of amendment or rescission or reconsideration are not to be jumped over, even when the invocation is triggered due to an error in (a.) reading; (b.) implication; (c.) inference; of one's bylaws, constitution, standing rules, etc.

The rules applying to how to edit text of a document remain in place, no matter the reason behind the edit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Robert, please get back to us on this critical point:

Was, in fact, the motion adopted a violation of any provision or provisions of the constitution or bylaws?  If so, then (pace, Messies Brown and Goldsworthy) the procedure to be followed is not to rescind or amend it -- because those are procedures that implicitly acknowledge that the motion is legitimate (which, if it is in contravention of the bylaws, it is not) -- but to raise a point of order which will point out (because it's pointy) that the motion is null and void, and we need only recognize that this is so:  we say so in the minutes, and maybe make a marginal note at the place in the earlier minutes that record the motion's adoption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Gary c Tesser said:

Guest Robert, please get back to us on this critical point:

Was, in fact, the motion adopted a violation of any provision or provisions of the constitution or bylaws?  If so, then (pace, Messies Brown and Goldsworthy) the procedure to be followed is not to rescind or amend it -- because those are procedures that implicitly acknowledge that the motion is legitimate (which, if it is in contravention of the bylaws, it is not) -- . . . .

Yeah, I started to say all that but figured the evidence was a bit on the slim side and I decided not to "go there".  Now, watch that turn out to be exactly the case!   (Gimme a break:  I think I was on my cell phone, where typing ain't easy and voice to text isn't so hot, either. It won't learn to spell Huynh or Honemann. And it thinks rescind is re-send).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...