laser158689

Are you absolutely sure on the 7 votes? See Policy 8320 of Baltimore County Public Schools. "No motion or resolution shall be declared adopted without the concurrence of a majority of the whole Board." IF I found the correct site, and IF there isn't another policy (on contracts, or required by state law, etc), then it seems that the "whole board" at the time of the vote is 11 members and 6 is a majority of 11. See RONR 44:9.b esp footnote 1. Not sure if the link is OK for this forum... Baltimore County Public Schools Policy 8320

My municipal legislative body sometimes has to approve documents - plans for this or that have to be filed with the state, for example. The documents are generated by another government "branch" or department. The resolutions simply say that the document "is approved". The document is provided separately, but is not included in its entirety (50+ pages for example) in the resolution. 1) Are we able to amend the attached document as part of handling the resolution to approve? 2) If so, should we be more specific about the document "as amended" at a particular meeting or similar? 3) Any other best practices around this type of situation? 4) Any traps to avoid?

Mr. Gerber - One might be fine with the appropriation, but object to a bond to finance it, especially if sufficient funds are available to finance it.

Thank you, Mr. Kapur!

I appreciate the thoughts. Our process is that the Moderator announces a "proposed organization" for our meeting, items designated for a Consent Calendar, and a "Combined Calendar" to combine the two items "for voting purposes". There is a motion to suspend the rules and combine the two items for voting purposes. It passes, often by unanimous consent (the minority that considers the bonding independently is often less than 5% of the membership). The first item is moved. Committee reports and debate come up for the first item, although often include the second item, including any amendments. Then reports & debate for the second item, including any amendments. Vote on the "combined items". Obviously, the vast majority of members don't have a problem with this, often myself included. I was curious 1) to verify the voting requirement for the combined items, and 2) if the fact that there are separate voting requirements might be more significant in some unexpected way. For Mr. Kapur - We occasionally have had some objections only to the bonding item during debate, when we've handled these types of items separately. That has been a very tiny minority, though, perhaps reinforcing the practice of combining them. Certainly, there has never been sufficient opposition to only the bonding to provide a real-world example.

We sometimes have two separate main motions, one for an appropriation and a second one authorizing a bond to pay for that appropriation. A majority vote is required for the appropriation, but a majority of the membership for authorizing bonds. We have in the past combined these motions and only had a single vote. Is this appropriate? Is it appropriate if we suspend the rules to do it?

Our town meeting normally moves on to the next item on our Call while a final, recorded vote (a unique voting process specified in our rules) on the previous item is being taken & tallied. Should we technically be using a motion to Lay on the Table or something else to move on to the next item?

Thanks!

Is there any sort of requirement to read the Call during a meeting?

@Josh Martin Thank you for the clarification. I've got to say, this concept of "orders" (general and special) has been a source of some frustration in my reading RONR, and falls under my general gripe of "Where is the definition of this technical term?"

To address those items that were not brought up... 1) Chair can simply put them on the Call for the next meeting and try again 2) Assembly could do "something" to "send" them to the next meeting. Options include... adopt an agenda including those item which would make them Orders of the Day and they would become Unfinished Business for the next meeting take each up individually and Postpone it (to the next meeting) suspend the rules to Postpone all of them (to the next meeting) any other options? 3) ?? And thanks so much for the replies!

Several items are noticed prior to a meeting in the Call. The meeting adjourns before getting to one or more of those items. The assembly meets monthly. Do the items that were not brought up carry over as unfinished business?

My own education. It's nice to know how it's supposed to work, and nice to provide some food for thought to the Moderator.

Not wasting my time or the body's appealing a ruling from our Moderator of 30+ years, no matter how wrong he is. And given the language in 39:5 that he will read, I can't win. I wouldn't for the argument I'd try to make.

The motion would be coming out of a committee, so no prior notice. I believe that's 2/3s or majority of the membership.

And I received a different view... Robert’s Rules expressly provides that “motions are not in order if they conflict with one or more motions previously adopted at any time and still in force”, unless made by way of a motion to rescind or amend something previously adopted. RONR (12th ed.) 39:5. (Emphasis added.) Thoughts?

Wow! Thank you so much for such a thorough explanation, especially the citations!

@Dan Honemann Our Moderator believes that we would need to Amend something previously adopted. I believe 12:28 is an adequate reference against that, but it would be by implication. Is there a more “direct”reference I can cite? Another way to ask this would be, what is the basis for striking an amendment added at a previous session? What rule “allows” this?

For my own education, let's say the amended main motion is not decided upon at meeting 1 and carries over to meeting (and session) 2 (tabled/postponed/adjourned/postponed). What options are there to remove/change the approved amendment? (Does the method of "carrying it over" affect the answer?) Reconsider seems out of order as it's a new session. Amend something previously Adopted? Other options?

My municipality has a "second reading rule" in its by-laws (see below). At the first meeting, we amended (added a clause to) one sentence in a section of the item. At the second meeting, would we need to Reconsider to further amend that sentence other than what was added? To remove what was added? 7. Second Reading A “Second Reading” Procedure shall apply for any resolution that:  Revises the Charter; or  Enacts or revises an ordinance; or  Revises the Rules of the Representative Town Meeting; or  Appears on the Call by way of a petition properly submitted. (all of the above are hereinafter “The Proposed Resolution”). The Proposed Resolution shall be voted upon by the Representative Town Meeting only when it has been subject to the following procedure: a. The Proposed Resolution, upon presentation to the Town Clerk, will be placed on the Call for the next Representative Town Meeting and referred to the appropriate committee(s) for review, revisions, and/or committee voting. b. The Proposed Resolution shall then be presented at that initial Representative Town Meeting, and committee reports shall be given. Discussion on the item will be appropriate. Motions to amend The Proposed Resolution may be voted upon at that meeting. c. The Moderator will then place the item on the Call of the next regularly scheduled Representative Town Meeting. -10- Eff. 4/20/2020 d. The Proposed Resolution, having been placed on the Call for the next regularly scheduled (subsequent) Representative Town Meeting, shall be referred to the appropriate committees for a “second” reading, revisions and/or committee voting. e. The Proposed Resolution may then be considered, committee reports delivered, discussed, amended as desired and voted upon at that subsequent Representative Town Meeting. f. Following standard voting procedure, The Proposed Resolution may be voted upon without a second reading if such motion is made and duly seconded to suspend this rule and move to vote in the initial meeting when presented. (Eff. 12/9/2019)

Thanks so much!

Update: The ad hoc committee Chair distributed a "memorandum" with a status update, indicating that they were still working. Our Moderator (assembly chair) does not have this on the Call, and when asked if we would have a report from the ad hoc committee at the meeting or an opportunity to vote on allowing the ad hoc committee to continue its work, said "no". How does one handle the lack of an item on the Call/Agenda? Especially given a FOIA requirements that the agenda be published at least 24 hours in advance?

Situation... Our municipal assembly committed a proposed ordinance change to an ad hoc (special) committee with the following clause "...and that the item be brought back to the December 2020 Meeting." The ad hoc committee issued a memo stating their work will not be completed by the December 2020 meeting. Our Call for our December 2020 meeting does not include this item. Our Calls often do not include committee reports explicitly, and we do not traditionally make motions during committee reports. Whether there will be a report is an open question. How would this situation look in another organization, ie what is best/common practice for this scenario? Given the actual situation, what is the appropriate way to allow the ad hoc committee to continue their work with another due date? Thanks!

Thanks!

Original item = resolution/main motion