David M. Zebuhr

new motion while one is pending vote

15 posts in this topic

No, but an amendment which changes the meaning of the first motion can be offered ( e.g., "I move to commend..." can be amended to state "I move to censure...").

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, David M. Zebuhr said:

What am I missing here?  That sounds exactly like a new motion in opposition to the first.

Mr. Lages is referring to the subsidiary motion to amend:

"The subsidiary motion to Amend is a motion to modify the wording—and within certain limits the meaning—of a pending motion before the pending motion itself is acted upon. " RONR, p. 130ff   

It's the longest section in book but you should read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A motion to Amend a pending motion is a proposal to change the wording of the current motion. If it's adopted, that doesn't mean that the new version has been officially adopted; it only means that the assembly has decided it prefers to consider that version instead of the original. There still needs to be taken on the main motion as amended, before it becomes an official action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  I failed to specify the additional detail in my original question that my motion had already been called for a vote.  At that point, surely, a subsidiary motion can't alter it, right?  It seems unreasonable that there are obstructions to a motion at such a late phase of its processing.  Can't I insist that the vote go forward and not have to wait for a new motion trying to negate it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, David M. Zebuhr said:

  I failed to specify the additional detail in my original question that my motion had already been called for a vote.  At that point, surely, a subsidiary motion can't alter it, right?  It seems unreasonable that there are obstructions to a motion at such a late phase of its processing.  Can't I insist that the vote go forward and not have to wait for a new motion trying to negate it? 

Are you conducting business electronically?  Otherwise you question seems hypothetical.  But yes, once the presiding officer puts the question to a vote in a meeting, no motion may interrupt the actual voting itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/12/2017 at 0:49 PM, David M. Zebuhr said:

Yes, electronic business as a homeowners association with three out of seven members absentee.  Thank you for your input.

Keep this in mind:

"*A group that attempts to conduct the deliberative process in writing—such as by postal mail, electronic mail (e-mail), or facsimile transmission (fax)—does not constitute a deliberative assembly. When making decisions by such means, many situations unprecedented in parliamentary law will arise, and many of its rules and customs will not be applicable (see also pp. 97–99). "  RONR (11th ed.), p. 1 fn.

Edited by George Mervosh
Edited page number for those not using the deluxe edition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2017 at 4:51 PM, David M. Zebuhr said:

When a motion has been made, seconded and discussed, can a new motion in opposition of it be moved before a vote is taken on the first motion?

Nope.  First you vote on the original motion, and if against it vote against it.  Then make a motion to do the opposite.  To take up on Bruce's example above: first you vote on the motion to commend something, and then if it defeated you are free to make a motion to censure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, George Mervosh said:

Are you conducting business electronically?  Otherwise you question seems hypothetical.  But yes, once the presiding officer puts the question to a vote in a meeting, no motion may interrupt the actual voting itself.

However, an interruption may occur before any member has actually voted. (RONR [11th ed.], p. 408, ll. 9–13) Couldn't someone jump in with a subsidiary motion at this point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Guest Who's Coming to Dinner said:

However, an interruption may occur before any member has actually voted. (RONR [11th ed.], p. 408, ll. 9–13) Couldn't someone jump in with a subsidiary motion at this point?

Only if the previous question has not been ordered or this body has not otherwise ended debate using whatever method it uses to end debate when voting electronically. I am assuming this group has no specific rule covering this scenario

Edited by Richard Brown
Typographical correction. Added a missing"not"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/12/2017 at 6:35 PM, Guest Who's Coming to Dinner said:

However, an interruption may occur before any member has actually voted. (RONR [11th ed.], p. 408, ll. 9–13) Couldn't someone jump in with a subsidiary motion at this point?

 

On 5/12/2017 at 7:25 PM, Richard Brown said:

Only if the previous question has not been ordered or this body has not otherwise ended debate using whatever method it uses to end debate when voting electronically. I am assuming this group has no specific rule covering this scenario

Which is why the footnote on p. 1 seems very applicable.  The answer to Mr. Zebuhr's question is really, who knows?

Edited by George Mervosh
Edited page number for those not using the deluxe edition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, George Mervosh said:

 

Which is why the footnote on p. 2 seems very applicable.  

Is that in the deluxe edition?  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

Is that in the deluxe edition?  :)

Yes, sir.  For normal people it's on p. 1 in the footnote. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Loading...