Sean Hunt Posted August 31, 2011 at 11:16 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2011 at 11:16 PM If the bylaws set an assembly's quorum, does it contradict the bylaws for the assembly to set a different quorum for informal consideration (as mentioned on p. 336)?If not, does this effectively allow a quorate assembly to avoid a loss of quorum by setting quorum in informal consideration to a lower value, and then considering a motion informally, given that it retains its full powers while in informal consideration? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted August 31, 2011 at 11:42 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2011 at 11:42 PM If the bylaws set an assembly's quorum, does it contradict the bylaws for the assembly to set a different quorum for informal consideration (as mentioned on p. 336)?If not, does this effectively allow a quorate assembly to avoid a loss of quorum by setting quorum in informal consideration to a lower value, and then considering a motion informally, given that it retains its full powers while in informal consideration? Informal Consideration merely lifts the limit on the number of speeches. Such a change would have no effect on the quorum requirement. The quorum in the Bylaws must be followed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted September 1, 2011 at 02:47 AM Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 at 02:47 AM If the bylaws set an assembly's quorum, does it contradict the bylaws for the assembly to set a different quorum for informal consideration (as mentioned on p. 336)?Yes. While RONR does note that the assembly may provide otherwise for a quorum for committee of the whole and its variations either in its Bylaws or rules of order, the assembly's special rules of order may not conflict with the Bylaws. Therefore, if the Bylaws prescribe a quorum for the assembly, then the assembly may only provide for a different quorum for committee of the whole and its variations by amending the Bylaws.If not, does this effectively allow a quorate assembly to avoid a loss of quorum by setting quorum in informal consideration to a lower value, and then considering a motion informally, given that it retains its full powers while in informal consideration?As noted, this is not an option if the Bylaws prescribe a quorum. Even if the Bylaws do not prescribe a quorum, prescribing a different quorum for informal consideration would require a special rule of order, so I don't think this is quite as concerning as you might imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted September 1, 2011 at 09:41 AM Author Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 at 09:41 AM As noted, this is not an option if the Bylaws prescribe a quorum. Even if the Bylaws do not prescribe a quorum, prescribing a different quorum for informal consideration would require a special rule of order, so I don't think this is quite as concerning as you might imagine.Oh, I'm not concerned. I just find myself corner cases and dig at them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted September 1, 2011 at 12:01 PM Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 at 12:01 PM If the bylaws set an assembly's quorum, does it contradict the bylaws for the assembly to set a different quorum for informal consideration (as mentioned on p. 336)?If not, does this effectively allow a quorate assembly to avoid a loss of quorum by setting quorum in informal consideration to a lower value, and then considering a motion informally, given that it retains its full powers while in informal consideration?Taking another look, it appears that you were asking a different question than I was answering In the future, try to anticipate my answer and ask accordingly. Mr. Martin seems to have covered the actual question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted September 1, 2011 at 12:41 PM Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 at 12:41 PM If the bylaws set an assembly's quorum, does it contradict the bylaws for the assembly to set a different quorum for informal consideration (as mentioned on p. 336)?If not, does this effectively allow a quorate assembly to avoid a loss of quorum by setting quorum in informal consideration to a lower value, and then considering a motion informally, given that it retains its full powers while in informal consideration?The assembly cannot set a different quorum for informal consideration.However, despite what is said on p. 336, the assembly can set a different quorum for a committee of the whole, as stated on pp. 520-521.Of course, this can be done only when a quorum (the real quorum, set in the bylaws) is present in the assembly; and, when the committee rises, the assembly can act on its report [on any substantive question] only when a quorum (the real quorum, set in the bylaws) is present in the assembly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted September 1, 2011 at 08:54 PM Author Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 at 08:54 PM The assembly cannot set a different quorum for informal consideration.That certainly makes sense; perhaps p. 336 shouldn't be read as authoritative when saying "or its variations"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted September 1, 2011 at 10:56 PM Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 at 10:56 PM That certainly makes sense; perhaps p. 336 shouldn't be read as authoritative when saying "or its variations"?Ok you have me confused As S.G. indicated p. 336 says you can not set a different quorum, then RONR, in standard fashion, makes an exception.Why is that confusing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted September 2, 2011 at 01:09 AM Author Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 01:09 AM Ok you have me confused As S.G. indicated p. 336 says you can not set a different quorum, then RONR, in standard fashion, makes an exception.Why is that confusing?My reading of p. 336 is that the assembly can set a different quorum for the committee of the whole or its variations either by bylaw or by special rule of order. Is this a wrong interpretation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted September 2, 2011 at 01:47 AM Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 01:47 AM My reading of p. 336 is that the assembly can set a different quorum for the committee of the whole or its variations either by bylaw or by special rule of order. Is this a wrong interpretation?No....and S.G. will tell me if I'm wrong but I don't think it takes a bylaw or SRO to change the quorum in a committee of the whole itself. S.G.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted September 2, 2011 at 02:35 AM Author Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 02:35 AM No....and S.G. will tell me if I'm wrong but I don't think it takes a bylaw or SRO to change the quorum in a committee of the whole itself. S.G.?Not in a committee of the whole; S.G. correctly points out that the bottom of p. 520 says that the assembly can set quorum for committee of the whole. It does not, however, say the same about quasi committee of the whole, or about informal consideration. To be honest, I'm a bit surprised by p.336 saying a special rule of order can do it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted September 2, 2011 at 02:48 AM Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 02:48 AM Not in a committee of the whole; S.G. correctly points out that the bottom of p. 520 says that the assembly can set quorum for committee of the whole. It does not, however, say the same about quasi committee of the whole, or about informal consideration. To be honest, I'm a bit surprised by p.336 saying a special rule of order can do it at all.Me too, and IF less than that can do it for the COH on p. 520, I'm even more surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted September 2, 2011 at 02:54 AM Author Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 02:54 AM Me too, and IF less than that can do it for the COH on p. 520, I'm even more surprised.Huh? p. 520 is very clear that the assembly can, when choosing to go into committee of the whole, set quorum however it likes, regardless of the bylaws. This shouldn't be nearly as much of a concern, though, as committee of the whole doesn't possess the assembly's full power in the same way that informal consideration does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted September 2, 2011 at 05:54 AM Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 05:54 AM The assembly could establish a quorum for a committee of the whole (p. 520), as noted. I would not see why, in the instrumentality of establishing any committee, the assembly could not establish the quorum.If the assembly wanted to establish a special committee of ten members, couldn't they add, "The quorum of this committee shall be three?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted September 2, 2011 at 12:11 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 12:11 PM Huh? p. 520 is very clear that the assembly can, when choosing to go into committee of the whole, set quorum however it likes, regardless of the bylaws. Well, not quite. If there is a provision in the bylaws establishing the quorum in committee of the whole, the assembly cannot establish a different quorum without amending the bylaws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted September 2, 2011 at 12:22 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 12:22 PM If the assembly wanted to establish a special committee of ten members, couldn't they add, "The quorum of this committee shall be three?"Sure, so long as neither the bylaws nor any rule of the parent body provides otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted September 2, 2011 at 02:13 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 02:13 PM Sure, so long as neither the bylaws nor any rule of the parent body provides otherwise.Of course. I don't think I've ever seen a case where the bylaws or a special rule sets the quorum for a special committee. In theory, if there was a bylaw, or rule that said, "The quorum for special committees shall be a majority of the members," the assembly could not set the quorum of the ten member committee at four. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted September 2, 2011 at 06:01 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 06:01 PM My reading of p. 336 is that the assembly can set a different quorum for the committee of the whole or its variations either by bylaw or by special rule of order. Is this a wrong interpretation?No....and S.G. will tell me if I'm wrong but I don't think it takes a bylaw or SRO to change the quorum in a committee of the whole itself. S.G.?On p. 336, RONR (10th ed.) says, "In a committee of the whole or its variations, the quorum is the same as in the assembly unless the rules of the assembly or the organization (that is, either its bylaws or its rules of order) specify otherwise."I agree with scshunt that if interpreted strictly, this sentence can be a bit misleading no matter how you slice it. A committee of the whole is a "real committee" in the parliamentary sense, and the assembly can establish a different quorum for it, by an ordinary instruction, in the absence of a bylaw or special rule of order. On the other hand, informal consideration and consideration in quasi committee take place in the assembly, and therefore a special rule of order cannot establish a different quorum for them, because that would contradict the quorum required for the assembly in the bylaws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted September 2, 2011 at 06:04 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 06:04 PM On p. 336, RONR (10th ed.) says, "In a committee of the whole or its variations, the quorum is the same as in the assembly unless the rules of the assembly or the organization (that is, either its bylaws or its rules of order) specify otherwise."I agree with scshunt that if interpreted strictly, this sentence can be a bit misleading no matter how you slice it. A committee of the whole is a "real committee" in the parliamentary sense, and the assembly can establish a different quorum for it, by an ordinary instruction, in the absence of a bylaw or special rule of order. On the other hand, informal consideration and consideration in quasi committee take place in the assembly, and therefore a special rule of order cannot establish a different quorum for them, because that would contradict the quorum required for the assembly in the bylaws.Wonderful explanation, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Rempel Posted September 2, 2011 at 06:55 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 06:55 PM Wonderful explanation, thanks.I hope the statement re variations of committee of the whole is worded differently in the 11th edition so that everyone can understand it on first reading or that it is stated clearly that informal consideration is not a variation of committee of the whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted September 2, 2011 at 07:06 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 07:06 PM I hope the statement re variations of committee of the whole is worded differently in the 11th edition so that everyone can understand it on first reading or that it is stated clearly that informal consideration is not a variation of committee of the whole.Actually, I think RONR, 10th ed., says that a motion to Consider Informally is a variation of a motion to Commit. Informal consideration is called one of two alternate forms of Committee of the Whole. See RONR (10th ed.), p. 160, l. 19; p. 512, l. 23. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Rempel Posted September 2, 2011 at 07:08 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 07:08 PM Actually, I think RONR, 10th ed., says that a motion to Consider Informally is a variation of a motion to Commit. Informal consideration is called one of two alternate forms of Committee of the Whole. See RONR (10th ed.), p. 160, l. 19; p. 512, l. 23.Yes, and that's why we are confused. So I would like to see this resolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted September 2, 2011 at 07:10 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 at 07:10 PM Yes, and that's why we are confused. So I would like to see this resolved.I'm not confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted September 4, 2011 at 01:11 AM Report Share Posted September 4, 2011 at 01:11 AM I hope the statement re variations of committee of the whole is worded differently in the 11th edition so that everyone can understand it on first reading or that it is stated clearly that informal consideration is not a variation of committee of the whole.Ann,I have little doubt that in the quoted sentence, the phrase "a committee of the whole or its variations" was intended to mean "a committee of the whole, quasi committee of the whole, or informal consideration." The only question is whether this sentence is fully consistent with rules given elsewhere in the book. In my opinion, for the reasons I gave before, it is not.Unfortunately, this sentence remains as is in the 11th edition (although other changes have been made in this paragraph).But you can be the first to put in a request for the 12th edition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted September 4, 2011 at 02:27 AM Author Report Share Posted September 4, 2011 at 02:27 AM But you can be the first to put in a request for the 12th edition. I think I will beat her to the punch. Thanks for clearing this issue up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.