Topic allowed that is not on agenda annual meeting

[Guest Sally]

Our congregation holds its annual meeting in January 2012, notice was sent to all members of meeting and topics to be discussed. At the annual meeting this year, the agenda was formally accepted with two items of business to be dealt with:

1. election of new board members

2. approval of the budget for the new year- and no other business was on the agenda.

Business was dealt with according to the agenda, and then when we were about to close, an individual rose and was recognized by the chair. The individual made a motion that the congregation reverse a very controversial action taken in the annual meeting in January 2010's meeting. (This action had been handled "legally" the 2011 meeting in that it had been in the notification for 2011 meeting that the issue would be voted on).

This year it was not on the agenda, and it had not been publicized that it would be discussed. Prior to the adoption of the agenda, this was not even mentioned, which would have been the appropriate time to add it to the agenda.

The chair allowed the vote to occur although caution was given that it should not be, since it was not on the agenda. Many individuals who had great interest in that topic would have been there had there been notification of it's coming to the floor for a vote. The chair allowed the vote and it passed by 16 votes to reverse the action in prior years meeting. Many people are upset that this was allowed to occur.

Was this action out of order or not and if so, what is the remedy?

Thanks

[Trina]

You seem to be mixing together two different concepts -- the agenda, and notice.

The agenda, once adopted at the meeting, should have been changed by amendment (as you note). However, if no timely point of order was raised, that's all water under the bridge now.

If there was indeed a requirement for notice associated with the motion, and if the requirement was not met, that would be a fatal flaw. However, since you say that the item could have been added before the agenda was adopted at the meeting, that leads to the conclusion that prior notice was not actually required. The fact that many people interested in the topic would have attended the meeting had they known that this matter would come up just means that prior notice would have been appreciated by those members; not that it was actually required by the rules. If your bylaws actually state that nothing can be added to a precirculated agenda (or something of that sort), then the absentees could perhaps argue that notice was required. Again, though, since you say the item could have been added before the agenda was adopted by the assembly, it doesn't sound as though any such rule is in effect.

It sounds like the unexpected motion was actually a motion to rescind the previous motion (when you say "reverse a very controversial action"). The motion to rescind has a higher voting threshold than an original motion -- it requires two-thirds vote without notice OR majority vote with notice OR a majority vote of the entire membership. Since notice was not given, you would have had to meet one of the other two conditions for the motion to rescind to be adopted. I don't know whether that happened (the fact that it passed by a 16 vote margin doesn't answer the question).

However, even if the required vote margin to rescind was not met, that again is water under the bridge if no timely point of order was raised. See Official Interpretation 2006-18.

The only way the action might be challenged after the fact is if the new motion is actually in conflict with the 2010 motion (rather than reversing or rescinding it). See this recent thread for extensive discussion of this type of issue (if you start around post #9, you'll get to the relevant discussion sooner).

[Guest Tony]

So I have a question to add to this thread. Once an agenda is adopted (after amended), I assume that having something brought before the assembly that was not on the agenda later in the meeting would be out of order?

[Gary Novosielski]

So I have a question to add to this thread. Once an agenda is adopted (after amended), I assume that having something brought before the assembly that was not on the agenda later in the meeting would be out of order?

Not necessarilly. The agenda might have included an item for New Business.

And even if not, a motion to amend the agenda to include the new item would have been in order. The vote requirements are those of a motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted.

[Josh Martin]

Was this action out of order or not and if so, what is the remedy?

The action was in order, at least based upon the facts provided. Nothing in RONR requires an item to be on the agenda to be considered.

The agenda, once adopted at the meeting, should have been changed by amendment (as you note).

Well, this probably would have been the best option, but this is not required. An agenda is simply a series of special orders and/or general orders. The adoption of the agenda does not preclude introducing items of New Business after the items on the agenda have been completed, provided the assembly has not yet adjourned.

Once an agenda is adopted (after amended), I assume that having something brought before the assembly that was not on the agenda later in the meeting would be out of order?

No. An agenda is simply a series of special orders and/or general orders. The adoption of the agenda does not preclude introducing items of New Business after the items on the agenda have been completed, provided the assembly has not yet adjourned.

Not necessarilly. The agenda might have included an item for New Business.

If you are suggesting that if the agenda does not provide for New Business, then New Business is out of order (except by amending the agenda), I disagree. An agenda is simply a series of special orders and/or general orders. The adoption of the agenda does not preclude introducing items of New Business after the items on the agenda have been completed, provided the assembly has not yet adjourned.

[Guest Sally]

Josh

Where does one find "the rules" which Trina refers to in the first post after my question? How does one know what items require advance notice to the membership prior to annual meetings? Where does one find such information?

thanks

[Guest Sally]

Trina or Josh

The vote at this meeting for this motion to rescind was no where near 2/3 vote. So is there a possible solution since we have a number of individuals who are feeling very disenfranchised at this point.

Thanks

[Josh Martin]

Where does one find "the rules" which Trina refers to in the first post after my question?

The rules regarding previous notice are found in RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 121-124.

How does one know what items require advance notice to the membership prior to annual meetings?

The following motions require previous notice:

• Elections to fill a vacancy in office (not for regular elections, though, as those are expected to come up).
  
• Amendments to the Constitution or Bylaws (usually - check your Bylaws to be sure, and see below if your Bylaws are silent).
  
• Other items for which your Bylaws or special rules of order prescribe previous notice.
  

The following items do not require previous notice, but previous notice lowers the voting threshold required for adoption from a 2/3 vote or a vote of a majority of the entire membership to a majority vote (the motion in question falls into this category unless your Bylaws or special rules of order prescribe previous notice, since it is in the nature of a motion to Rescind):

• Rescind or Amend Something Previously Adopted (unless applied to something which falls under one of the other categories, such as Bylaws)
  
• Discharge a Committee (unless the assembly is considering a partial report of the committee or the committee fails to report when instructed)
  
• Depose an officer (when a trial is not required - see FAQ #20)
  

The following items virtually require previous notice, as previous notice lowers the voting threshold required for adoption from a vote of a majority of the entire membership (which is often unattainable) to a 2/3 vote:

• Adopting, amending, or rescinding special rules of order.
  
• Amending or rescinding the Constitution or Bylaws if they are silent on the method of amendment.
  
• Adopting a parliamentary authority, if no authority is prescribed in the Bylaws.
  

Where does one find such information?

See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 121-124; pg. 291, lines 20-25; pgs. 580-582; tinted pgs. 44-45. The index entry for "notice (of motions), previous notice" is found in RONR, 11th ed., pg. 696, if you want even more information on the subject.

Based on the facts provided so far, I'd say that the motion required falls under the category of motions which do not require previous notice, but previous notice lowers the voting threshold required for adoption from a 2/3 vote or a vote of a majority of the entire membership to a majority vote. If that's the case, it's too late to do anything about it. The situation might be different if your Bylaws have special rules on this or if the original action was either a special rule of order or an amendment to the Constitution or Bylaws.

[Chris Harrison]

Where does one find "the rules" which Trina refers to in the first post after my question? How does one know what items require advance notice to the membership prior to annual meetings? Where does one find such information?

thanks

Besides filling a vacancy there is nothing in RONR that absolutely requires that previous notice be given for a specific item to be introduced in a regularly called meeting (which an Annual Meeting would be). Any such requirements would be located in the organization's governing documents (bylaws, constitution,etc).

The vote at this meeting for this motion to rescind was no where near 2/3 vote. So is there a possible solution since we have a number of individuals who are feeling very disenfranchised at this point.

Thanks

Two questions:

1) Did the member making the motion specifically say that he was moving to Rescind (Repeal, Annul) the previously adopted motion?

2) How many members does the entire organization have and how many voted in favor of the motion? Besides the 2/3 vote which you said wasn't achieved another option for adopting the motion is by a majority of the ENTIRE membership of the organization so exact numbers would be needed.

[Josh Martin]

1) Did the member making the motion specifically say that he was moving to Rescind (Repeal, Annul) the previously adopted motion?

So you think "reverse" (the word used in the original post) wouldn't cut it?

[Chris Harrison]

So you think "reverse" (the word used in the original post) wouldn't cut it?

Well RONR doesn't list "reverse" as a permissible alternative wording but if the OP wasn't paraphrasing what the member said and he actually did say "reverse" in the motion I would be willing to spot him that one.

[Josh Martin]

Well RONR doesn't list "reverse" as a permissible alternative wording but if the OP wasn't paraphrasing what the member said and he actually did say "reverse" in the motion I would be willing to spot him that one.

Okay. I acknowledge that the paraphrase may be inaccurate. I just wanted to make sure you weren't being a stickler on the wording. "Reverse" is not a preferred term for the motion to Rescind, but the intent seems clear.

[Guest Sally]

Thank you kind gentlemen and lady for your responses, it has been ver helpful. I will go to our document and confirm what must have previous notice and may have further questons in a few days.

Again thank you ll for you help and time.