lipets Posted May 9, 2011 at 07:59 PM Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 at 07:59 PM In voting on a Revision we want to vote on several amendments, but hold the final vote off until the next meeting.I read p. 172 that a motion to postpone to a date certain appears to apply.I'm I correct?tks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted May 9, 2011 at 08:00 PM Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 at 08:00 PM Sure, as long as your next meeting is within a quarterly time interval. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lipets Posted May 9, 2011 at 08:03 PM Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 at 08:03 PM It's an annual meeting generally, is that an issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted May 9, 2011 at 08:05 PM Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 at 08:05 PM It's an annual meeting generally, is that an issue?See p. 175 "LIMITS ON POSTPONEMENT AND THEIR RELATION TO MEETING AND SESSION." An adjourned meeting might do the trick if it's feasible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted May 9, 2011 at 08:05 PM Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 at 08:05 PM It's an annual meeting generally, is that an issue?Will there be a meeting within about 3 months of the meeting where the revisions are considered? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lipets Posted May 9, 2011 at 08:25 PM Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 at 08:25 PM there will be about the revision but not a meeting involving a vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted May 9, 2011 at 08:26 PM Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 at 08:26 PM And if postponing is out of order for some good reason or another (see p. 175 ff. in RONR for some of them), you could instead refer the set of amendments (back) to the Bylaws Committee with instructions to report back next (annual) meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:04 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:04 PM It's an annual meeting generally, is that an issue?It's not an issue as relates to the classes of business that may be discussed. Annual meetings sometimes have classes of business that can ONLY be transacted at the AGM, but all normal business may also come before an annual meeting. Except for the fact that special business such as elections is usually done there, annual meetings are in other respects "regular" meetings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:13 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:13 PM In voting on a Revision we want to vote on several amendments, but hold the final vote off until the next meeting.I read p. 172 that a motion to postpone to a date certain appears to apply.I'm I correct?tksStrictly speaking, without some kind of special rule of the organization, there is no way to fix the time of the vote on a pending question for a later session. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:15 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:15 PM Strictly speaking, without some kind of special rule of the organization, there is no way to fix the time of the vote on a pending question for a later session.What's wrong with Postpone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:21 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:21 PM What's wrong with Postpone?As I understand the original post, the intention is to fix the time for the final vote on the pending main motion to the next session. Postpone to a Certain Time does not do this. In fact, trying to do so infringes on the freedom of the latter session. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike 456 Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:27 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:27 PM Strictly speaking, without some kind of special rule of the organization, there is no way to fix the time of the vote on a pending question for a later session.How would a special rule be put in place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:50 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:50 PM How would a special rule be put in place?Such a rule violates a fundamental principle of parliamentary law and is not in the best interests of most ordinary societies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:56 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:56 PM What "principle" would that be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:59 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 06:59 PM What "principle" would that be?See RONR (10th ed.), p. 85, ll. 14-20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:00 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:00 PM How would a special rule be put in place?Are you asking this in regards to Jimbo2010's question, or are you just asking how a special rule gets put in place? If it isn't related to this thread, it would be best to ask your own question separately on the forum, so we don't get all muddled with the answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:09 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:09 PM As I understand the original post, the intention is to fix the time for the final vote on the pending main motion to the next session. Postpone to a Certain Time does not do this. In fact, trying to do so infringes on the freedom of the latter session.Huh? If they move to Postpone until the next meeting, that stops discussion immediately, and naturally postpones the final vote until the next meeting as well. It's an ordinary motion to Postpone to a Certain Time. Nothing special about it. It accomplishes the goal and does not infringe on any freedoms at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:16 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:16 PM See RONR (10th ed.), p. 85, ll. 14-20.Scenario: JIMBO2010's revision is pending, all amendments appear to have been dealt with, and debate appears to have petered out. The Chair asks "Are you ready for the question?"Member Elsman promptly gets recognition, moves that the pending motion be postponed to the next meeting, and made a special order for 9:30 AM at that meeting. Adopted by a proper 2/3 margin. This accomplishes exactly what JIMBO2010 wanted.Are your saying that Member Elsman's postpone motion should be ruled out of order because it "violates a fundamental rule" about tying the hands of a majority at that next meeting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:16 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:16 PM Huh? If they move to Postpone until the next meeting, that stops discussion immediately, and naturally postpones the final vote until the next meeting as well. It's an ordinary motion to Postpone to a Certain Time. Nothing special about it. It accomplishes the goal and does not infringe on any freedoms at all.If I'm in the chair when a member obstinately insists on making a motion in the form, "that the vote be held at the next meeting [session]", I will have no option but to rule the motion out of order on account that the motion to postpone is improperly formed and violates a fundamental principle of parliamentary law by infringing on the freedom of the next session. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jimbo 9999 Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:21 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:21 PM What about the 3 month time frame of the next meeting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:24 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:24 PM What about the 3 month time frame of the next meetingIf the next meeting is within a "quarterly time interval" -- defined on p. 88 of RONR -- then postpone to that next meeting is perfectly proper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:28 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:28 PM Rob is losing me, again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:35 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 07:35 PM Rob is losing me, again.George, you don't postpone a vote. You postpone a main motion (and what adheres to it), presentation of a committee report, etc. Postpone to a Certain Time decides nothing about when, if ever, a question will be put to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted May 10, 2011 at 08:18 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 08:18 PM George, you don't postpone a vote. You postpone a main motion (and what adheres to it), presentation of a committee report, etc. Postpone to a Certain Time decides nothing about when, if ever, a question will be put to vote.Your post from 3:16PM is simply laughable, since the original poster never obstinately said that was his motion. He wants to postpone the pending question, nothing more (which postpones the final vote on it as well). And if you obstinately didn't help the member phrase the motion correctly, shame on you, as the chair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted May 10, 2011 at 08:24 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 at 08:24 PM Your post from 3:16PM is simply laughable, since the original poster never obstinately said that was his motion. He wants to postpone the pending question, nothing more (which postpones the final vote on it as well). And if you obstinately didn't help the member phrase the motion correctly, shame on you, as the chair.Well, we've had posters ask about whether they could postpone only the vote to a subsequent meeting, so I think Mr. Elsman's concerns are well-founded. I'm not sure of the original poster's intent, but the bottom line is that the motion can be postponed, although that won't stop members from debating the motion at the later meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.