Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Guest Karen M.

Recommended Posts

Hello. I know that a motion to rescind needs a majority with notice or 2/3 vote with no notice and that RR indicates notice is defined as occurring at the previous meeting or the call for the meeting; I would like to confirm my interpretation of this.

We have monthly meetings that are prescheduled and notice is given months in advance. At our last regular meeting (2 weeks ago) we agreed to have a special meeting to continue to work on details related to a previous motion. I also sent out an agenda 6 days ahead of the meeting. Just yesterday (no more than 48 hours before this meeting), a member notified through email that he would be making a motion to rescind a previous motion that passed and requested that it be placed first thing on the agenda as it would affect the rest of the meeting (if his motion passes). This does not appear to meet any requirements for "notice" but I want to be sure before I rule that a 2/3 vote is necessary for his motion to pass.

Thanks very much,

K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, your bylaws, or for that matter your state's code, may define "minimum meeting notice." If not, then what Roberts says is that meeting notices must be "reasonable." That is a judgment call, and as the presiding officer, you are the initial "judge," and make a ruling. If the body disagrees, it can appeal from your ruling and overturn it.

The rule on notice time exists for the benefit of members who may choose not to attend. Is 48 hours enough time for them to adjust their plans if the matter is important to them? Quite possibly not. A usual kind of rule is generally more like ten days or two weeks.

Also, it clearly was not in the call to the meeting, which is distributed by the leadership. Sending it to the leadership, or even the entire membership, doesn't make it part of the call.

And another matter may be whether or not the motion is in order at all. You say its adoption would alter the meeting. But is it germane to the business under consideration? If not, it may not be in order at this special meeting since it wasn't included in the call to meeting. Again, that is your ruling to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your understanding of the rule is correct as far as it goes, but the rule has one other part:  A motion to rescind something previously adopted can also be adopted by a majority of the entire membership.  In the case of a board or a small group where most (or all) members are in attendance, achieving the vote of a majority of the entire membership might be easier than a two thirds vote.

I agree with Mr. Goodwiller's response and would add that although it is ultimately up  to the presiding officer (or the assembly) to decide, I really question whether the consideration of his motion would be proper at all if it is not included in the business to be conducted pursuant to the call of the meeting.  In a special meeting, only those items specifically mentioned in the call of the meeting can be considered. That is an entirely separate issue from the vote requirement to adopt a motion to rescind.  I suspect that this will be a judgment call on the part of the presiding officer with a possible appeal from the ruling of the chair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Richard Brown said:

I agree with Mr. Goodwiller's response and would add that although it is ultimately up  to the presiding officer (or the assembly) to decide, I really question whether the consideration of his motion would be proper at all if it is not included in the business to be conducted pursuant to the call of the meeting.  In a special meeting, only those items specifically mentioned in the call of the meeting can be considered. That is an entirely separate issue from the vote requirement to adopt a motion to rescind.  I suspect that this will be a judgment call on the part of the presiding officer with a possible appeal from the ruling of the chair.

I agree if this is truly a special meeting. A special meeting may only be held if permitted by your bylaws. If, instead, this is actually just an adjournment of the regular meeting, then there are on restrictions on the business to consider.

Quote

We have monthly meetings that are prescheduled and notice is given months in advance. At our last regular meeting (2 weeks ago) we agreed to have a special meeting to continue to work on details related to a previous motion. I also sent out an agenda 6 days ahead of the meeting. Just yesterday (no more than 48 hours before this meeting), a member notified through email that he would be making a motion to rescind a previous motion that passed and requested that it be placed first thing on the agenda as it would affect the rest of the meeting (if his motion passes). This does not appear to meet any requirements for "notice" but I want to be sure before I rule that a 2/3 vote is necessary for his motion to pass.

If the original motion that you were dealing with and decided to hold this meeting to finish working on was already pending at the time, then consideration should automatically be resumed without a member having an opportunity to make a new motion. If this member wishes their motion to Rescind to be considered first, they should move to Lay on the Table the pending motion so that they can introduce their motion.

If the business is not pending, and is ready to be moved, then you should recognize the member who will move that motion (p. 381, ll. 4-9). If it is not ready to be moved (because this is a small board that does informal discussion before a motion is moved), then you would eventually have to recognize the member who wishes to make a motion to Rescind as a part of that process and, because no motion is pending, the motion to Rescind would be properly made and take precedence over the ongoing discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Alexis Hunt that this upcoming "special meeting" might actually be more in the nature of an adjourned meeting than a special meeting. That issue has concerned me since I read the first post. Part of that concern is because of the original poster's statement that she sent out an agenda six days prior to the meeting, but said nothing about issuing an actual call or notice of a special meeting.

If this is an adjourned meeting rather than a special meeting, it is a different situation and some of what we have previously said will not apply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello and thanks for all the feedback. To (hopefully) clarify: the last meeting ended with a decision to continue discussion on an issue in hopes of moving towards one or more votes on the issue, there was no actual motion on the table at that point. In light of time/deadlines, we agreed to chose a date that the majority in the room (which is most of the membership) could attend. I sent out a reminder and agenda (with two items of business on them) six days prior. I had previously sent out a confirmation/reminder of the meeting on the day we decided we would hold an additional meeting (which was two weeks ago). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Who's Coming to Dinner

Why do people think meetings are inevitably bound to agendas that are prepared in advance by some authority? That may be the standard in the commercial world where the "chair" is your boss, but it does not apply in the parliamentary situation. The assembly is not bound to follow an agenda unless they have adopted it.

In the case of a special meeting, it's not an agenda but a call that's sent out in advance. The call specifies what will be considered, and in this case, the assembly is restricted to the business mentioned in the call. In addition, a special meeting can only be called according to the procedure in the bylaws. If there is no provision, then special meetings are not permitted.

So, is this a special meeting that was properly called? If so, then you are restricted to what it was called for and cannot consider the member's motion to rescind. Otherwise, it appears to be an adjournment (continuation) of your regular meeting and you can consider any motion that would be in order at a regular meeting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To nitpick dinner guest's comment just a bit, I think we all acknowledge that laymen untrained in the finer points of parliamentary procedure are not aware of everything in the 716 plus pages of RONR and do not do things precisely as professional parliamentarians would. 

We regulars on this forum might be aware of the difference between a notice or call of a special meeting and an agenda for a special meeting, but it has been my experience that laymen frequently assume that the agenda amounts to a specification of the business to be discussed  at the special meeting. I am not going to fault guest Karen for not having sent out a professionally drafted notice of a special meeting. I suspect that in her mind and in the minds of almost all of the other members, that agenda serves as notice of the items to be discussed at the special meeting.

If someone raises a point of order that the notice or agenda is somehow deficient, she or whoever the presiding officer is will rule on that point of order and the ruling can be appealed to the assembly.

I think they are doing the best they can and she should be commended for coming here for help

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...