harper

[Guest harper]

Greetings. Two simple questions: If a point of order is raised about a previous board resolution that affects a new board resolution, what is the procedure? Must the point of order be addressed before the new resolution can be addressed? And who decides to act on the point of order - the chair? Thank you.

[Hieu H. Huynh]

Why is a point of order being raised?

[Guest Harper]

1 hour ago, Hieu H. Huynh said:

Why is a point of order being raised?

I'll try to give an equivalent without getting into detail. If a spending resolution was approved at one meeting and a new spending resolution was proposed at a subsequent meeting that seems to contradict or undermine the earlier resolution, can a member of the board call a point of order calling for the secretary to read out the earlier resolution before a vote is taken on the new? Or have I misidentified the procedural point? Is it a point of information? Either way, the prior resolution affects the subsequent resolution.

[Dan Honemann]

No main motion is in order that conflicts with a motion previously adopted and still in force (except, of course, a motion to rescind or to amend the previously adopted motion). In the event of such a conflict, a point of order should be raised concerning the validity of the new motion, not the one previously adopted.

[Hieu H. Huynh]

An adopted motion could be rescinded or amended using the motion to Rescind or Amend Something Previously Adopted. This motion requires a two-thirds vote, a majority vote with previous notice, or a vote of a majority of the entire membership.

[Guest Harper]

1 hour ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

No main motion is in order that conflicts with a motion previously adopted and still in force (except, of course, a motion to rescind or to amend the previously adopted motion). In the event of such a conflict, a point of order should be raised concerning the validity of the new motion, not the one previously adopted.

Thank you Mr. Honemann and Mr. Huynh. So in practical terms, what does raising a 'point of order' about the new motion mean? Does it mean, for instance, that the previous motion must be addressed (amended, rescinded, whatever) first, before action can be taken on the new motion? And the chair, of course, makes this determination? Thank you.

 

 

 

[Hieu H. Huynh]

I think the new motion should be handled as a motion to rescind or amend the previously adopted motion. If adopted, the new motion would be in effect. I think it is appropriate for the chair to handle it this way if that is the intent of the new motion.

[Gary Novosielski]

5 hours ago, Guest Harper said:

Thank you Mr. Honemann and Mr. Huynh. So in practical terms, what does raising a 'point of order' about the new motion mean? Does it mean, for instance, that the previous motion must be addressed (amended, rescinded, whatever) first, before action can be taken on the new motion? And the chair, of course, makes this determination? Thank you.

The chair could simply rule the motion out of order (subject to Appeal), and then move on to the next item of business.

But a more helpful chair might help the mover to craft a proper motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted.  If not, there is nothing stopping the mover from figuring out how to properly phrase the motion, and doing so.