Limit/Extend Debate

[Guest jzad]

Our organization's governing documents are split into 3 parts: General Procedures, Policy Statements, and Bylaws. Our Policy Statements have a section in them regarding the debate of resolutions. It states:

b. Debate of Resolutions

i. Resolutions shall not be in order until they have been reported out of the Resolutions Committee.

ii. Debate my be had on the floor of the Meeting for all resolutions, save such as are known in parliamentary practice as "undebatable," unless by 2/3 vote the Convention decides to dispose of them without debate.

iii. No member shall speak in any one session on any on subject longer than 3 minutes except as provided in the Order of the Day or by majority vote. Debates shall be managed as defined in the Policy and Procedure Statements approved by the Board.

Clearly, section iii. speaks directly on how long and how often a person can speak while debating a resolution at the convention. Robert's Rules, however, states that in order to extend or limit the debate, you need to move to do so and must obtain a 2/3 vote to limit/extend debate b/c it is a specialized suspension of the rules.

The crux of my question is, our policies state majority vote, RONR says 2/3, who wins? And also, if your policies win, should I still conduct the motion to limit/extend as is done in RONR (the forms and examples)?

[Guest jzad]

Our organization's governing documents are split into 3 parts: General Procedures, Policy Statements, and Bylaws. Our Policy Statements have a section in them regarding the debate of resolutions. It states:

b. Debate of Resolutions

i. Resolutions shall not be in order until they have been reported out of the Resolutions Committee.

ii. Debate my be had on the floor of the Meeting for all resolutions, save such as are known in parliamentary practice as "undebatable," unless by 2/3 vote the Convention decides to dispose of them without debate.

iii. No member shall speak in any one session on any one* subject longer than 3 minutes except as provided in the Order of the Day or by majority vote. Debates shall be managed as defined in the Policy and Procedure Statements approved by the Board.

Clearly, section iii. speaks directly on how long and how often a person can speak while debating a resolution at the convention. Robert's Rules, however, states that in order to extend or limit the debate, you need to move to do so and must obtain a 2/3 vote to limit/extend debate b/c it is a specialized suspension of the rules.

The crux of my question is, our policies state majority vote, RONR says 2/3, who wins? And also, if your policies win, should I still conduct the motion to limit/extend as is done in RONR (the forms and examples)?

[J. J.]

If your "policy statement" was adopted as a special rule by the assembly meeting, it would supersede the RONR requirements for limiting debate.

[Guest jzad]

The Policy Statement was adopted in 2008 after the two predecessor organizations merged. Their bylaws were replaced by this Policy Statement.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

... ii. Debate my be had on the floor of the Meeting for all resolutions, save such as are known in parliamentary practice as "undebatable," unless by 2/3 vote the Convention decides to dispose of them without debate.

iii. No member shall speak in any one session on any on subject longer than 3 minutes except as provided in the Order of the Day or by majority vote. Debates shall be managed as defined in the Policy and Procedure Statements approved by the Board.

Clearly, section iii. speaks directly on how long and how often a person can speak while debating a resolution at the convention.

Robert's Rules, however, states that in order to extend or limit the debate, you need to move to do so and must obtain a 2/3 vote to limit/extend debate b/c it is a specialized suspension of the rules.

Our policies state majority vote, RONR says 2/3, who wins?

If our policies win, should I still conduct the motion to limit/extend as is done in RONR (the forms and examples)?

Who wins?

The organization's customized rule wins, where there is a conflict.

So, for you, the vote threshold is majority vote.

The words the chair utters does not change, just because the vote threshold is different, except when announcing the result of the vote, of course, as page 188-189 gives.

(E.g., you are not to say, "There are two thirds in the affirmative.")

[Guest jzad]

Thank you Kim, I appreciate the input!

[Guest jzad]

on second thought, is there a provision in RONR that states special rules of the Organization trump RONR? And if so might you know where it is off the top of your head? Much obliged!

[Trina]

on second thought, is there a provision in RONR that states special rules of the Organization trump RONR? And if so might you know where it is off the top of your head? Much obliged!

'When a society or an assemby has adopted a particular parliamentary manual -- such as this book -- as its parliamentary authority, the rules contained in that manual are binding upon it in all cases where they are not inconsistent with the bylaws (or constitution) or any special rule of order of the body...' (RONR p. 16)