Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums
Guest guest1234

Removing a circulating amendment before a vote

Recommended Posts

Guest guest1234

Hello,

In Robert's Rules of Order,  can the submitter of a change to a constitutional amendment decide to remove that change if it has already been circulated and on the agenda for the next business meeting? Or can they only table the vote once the business meeting occurs? In other words, can the submitter choose to remove their proposed amendment for voting before the business meeting? Thanks for any advice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He can withdraw (to use the RONR-style word) it (or just not make the motion at all) ...  but ... any other member could make to motion to adopt the amendment at the meeting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Who's Coming to Dinner

That's the vanilla answer according to RONR. I suspect custom rules are in play here and have something to say about the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in case you want the recipe for vanilla:  page 307, line 23ff.

I wonder, however, does that rule apply to any motions for which previous notice is required?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jstackpo said:

He can withdraw (to use the RONR-style word) it (or just not make the motion at all) ...  but ... any other member could make to motion to adopt the amendment at the meeting.

3 hours ago, jstackpo said:

And in case you want the recipe for vanilla:  page 307, line 23ff.

But actually, that rule simply says that if the member who provided previous notice for a motion does not make the motion, another member may make it. The rule regarding formal withdrawal of a notice is different, and is stated on page 297, lines 20-25: "... a previous notice of a proposed motion requiring such notice ... cannot be withdrawn after it is too late for renewal, unless unanimous consent is given."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jstackpo said:

And in case you want the recipe for vanilla:  page 307, line 23ff.

I wonder, however, does that rule apply to any motions for which previous notice is required?

Why shouldn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest1234

So if they decide to withdraw, do they just have to tell the officer running the business meeting before a motion is made?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Guest guest1234 said:

So if they decide to withdraw, do they just have to tell the officer running the business meeting before a motion is made?

 

1 minute ago, Guest guest1234 said:

@Shmuel Gerber What does "after it is too late for renewal" mean?

"Too late for renewal" means that it's too late for another member to provide the same notice. So at this point, after the actual notice of the meeting has already been sent, presumably it is too late -- and so it makes no difference what the original proposer of the change wants, and the notice cannot be withdrawn.

However, I'm not sure what you mean by "the submitter of a change to a constitutional amendment." If you mean that there is a constitutional amendment that is going to be considered at the meeting, and a member provided notice of wanting to offer an amendment ("change") to that amendment, then the possibility of withdrawing notice of the "change" will depend on whether or not the "change" exceeds the scope of the original "amendment." 

But that is all just technical stuff. The bottom line is that if any members other than the original provider of notice want the change to be considered, they can make that happen, either by providing another notice (probably not in this case, though, because it's too late) or by making the motion themselves based on the original notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Who's Coming to Dinner
22 minutes ago, Guest guest1234 said:

So if they decide to withdraw, do they just have to tell the officer running the business meeting before a motion is made?

That would be a smooth way of handling it, although the chair is not obligated to refuse the motion should it is made by someone else. Perhaps you think the agenda is controlling and must be revised before the meeting. That is not the case under RONR, which provides that there is no binding agenda except the one adopted by the assembly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest1234

For this case I am the person who both submitted the proposed amendment change and want to withdraw the proposal due to some circumstances that came up after the proposal deadline. I want to see if I have the right to pull that amendment from the agenda and not bring it to a vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Guest guest1234 said:

For this case I am the person who both submitted the proposed amendment change and want to withdraw the proposal due to some circumstances that came up after the proposal deadline. I want to see if I have the right to pull that amendment from the agenda and not bring it to a vote.

No, you do not have that right.

Share this post


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

That would be a smooth way of handling it, although the chair is not obligated to refuse the motion should it is made by someone else.

I think I'd word this differently.  The chair is obligated to properly handle the motion (which has the required notice) should it be made by someone else.  

To the OP: the closest you can get, I think, to what you want is to move to amend the agenda while it is pending by striking the item.  If the body agrees to strike the agenda item, it will not come up (unless other parliamentary steps are taken).  The body, though, is free to refuse to amend the agenda in that manner.  

There should be no talk of "tabling" in this connection.  Should the body wish to take up the amendment (and someone moves it when the agenda item comes up), which has been noticed and is its right, you should speak against its adoption and vote no.  You could also move to postpone indefinitely or use other parliamentary manuevers to defeat it, but lay on the table is not one of them.

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...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  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

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

Loading...

×