Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Shmuel Gerber

Administrators
  • Posts

    4,470
  • Joined

Everything posted by Shmuel Gerber

  1. It can be said to apply to all pending questions, because when the allotted time for consideration of the main motion expires, all pending questions will be put to a vote without further debate or amendment. (15:12) Is there some other example of how the last sentence of 15:11 would apply that you think is more clearly in order?
  2. I think so, although perhaps it could be worded more clearly. The intention is to limit debate on the main motion and all secondary motions (that are pending or may become pending) so that a vote will be taken after no more than 20 minutes of debate.
  3. Well it seems that in this organization everything from voting to quorum to ratification to conflict of interest is defined or handled differently than in RONR, so I'm not sure we can be of much help here.
  4. A quorum is the number of members who must be present at a meeting in order to conduct business. It has nothing to do with the number of members who voted. You seem to be dealing with some sort of online election system with its own rules, so I have no idea what a quorum means in this context.
  5. This sentence does not make sense to me. There's no such thing as a candidate who did not meet quorum.
  6. I agree with Mr. Martin's explanation. In this sentence, "those motions" are the motions to Commit or to Postpone. So when the book says, "the remaining questions may be postponed or committed at the time those motions come to a vote," it simply means that the motions to Commit or Postpone are voted on as they normally would be — despite the adoption of the motion to Limit Debate — and, if they are adopted, they cause the remaining questions in the series (the main motion and the other pending motions adhering to the main motion) to be committed or postponed. For example, suppose a main motion and an amendment are pending, and it is moved to postpone the pending questions to the next meeting. While all these motions are pending, it is moved and adopted to limit debate on the main motion to 20 minutes. The same motion to Postpone could not have been moved after adoption of this motion to Limit Debate. However, it was moved beforehand and remains pending. The last sentence of 15:11 is telling us that, in this situation, the main motion and the amendment can still be postponed to the next meeting by the assembly's voting in favor of the pending motion to Postpone.
  7. But we've been told that there may be 75 candidates altogether. Under this system of taking two ballots, that would mean that on the second ballot, every member could vote for every candidate, which would be useless for purposes of ranking.
  8. But RONR does not discuss this particular situation, where the assembly is attempting to fill 50 delegate seats, and using the results of that election as a ranking mechanism for up to 50 additional alternates. I think the closest parallel that is discussed in RONR (46:34) is the election of directors with varying terms, in which those with more votes are given the longer terms.
  9. I don't see where the book says that the alternates are ranked in order of the number of votes received — although that is one possibility for the method of ranking. It also does not say that the number of alternates should always equal the number of delegates; it says the numbers frequently are equal.
  10. To (legally) obtain the text of RONR, you need to buy (or borrow) the book, which is available in several print and electronic editions. https://robertsrules.com/purchase/ Regarding your question: 4:16 "In principle, the chair must state the question on a motion immediately after it has been made and seconded, unless he is obliged to rule that the motion is not in order or unless, in his opinion, the wording is not clear." 4:17 "Rules and explanations relating to the conditions under which various motions are not in order will be found particularly in 5, 6, and 7; in 10:26–27; and in the first three of the “Standard Descriptive Characteristics” given in the sections on each of the parliamentary motions (11–37). When a member who has legitimately obtained the floor offers a motion which is not in order, the chair may be able, in certain instances, to suggest an alternative motion which would be in order and would carry out the desired intent to the satisfaction of the maker. If the chair is obliged to rule that the motion is not in order, he says, “The chair rules that the motion is not in order [or “is out of order”] because… [briefly stating the reason].” (He must not say, “You are out of order,” nor, “Your motion is out of order.” To state that a member is out of order implies that the member is guilty of a breach of decorum or other misconduct in a meeting; and even in such a case, the chair does not normally address the member in the second person. See 3:13; also 61.) If the chair rules that a motion is not in order, his decision is subject to an appeal to the judgment of the assembly. (For procedure regarding Appeal, see 24.)"
  11. Why not just move to limit debate by forbidding the making of any amendments?
  12. A motion to limit debate has the effect of suspending the regular rules relating to debate insofar as the adopted limits are incompatible with such regular rules, but it certainly does not suspend the rules relating to itself and to all the other rules in the book. Therefore I do not think it is helpful to generally think of adopting a subsidiary motion to limit debate as adopting a motion to suspend the rules.
  13. No need to suppose: 48:12 "Exceptions to the rule that minutes are approved at the next regular meeting (or at the next meeting within the session) arise when the next meeting will not be held within a quarterly time interval, when the term of a specified portion of the membership will expire before the start of the next meeting, or when, as at the final meeting of a convention, the assembly will be dissolved at the close of the present meeting. In any of these cases, minutes that have not been approved previously should be approved before final adjournment, or the assembly should authorize the executive board or a special committee to approve the minutes."
  14. I think this may be where we disagree. It is not the adjournment previously set that is being taken up early. Rather, a new, earlier adjournment, is being moved.
  15. Well, actually a motion for the previous question might conflict with the motion to limit debate, but nonetheless it is in order (and requires a 2/3 vote).
  16. I'm with you so far. Now you've lost me. You just said that the subsidiary motion to limit debate was adopted. There is no actual suspension of the rules involved. There is no order suspending the rules and closing debate; there is only an order closing debate under the rules for that motion. I can think of no rule in RONR that precludes a motion to adjourn in this scenario. No. The motion to adjourn does not conflict with the motion limiting debate. Neither would a motion to postpone indefinitely, for the previous question, to lay on the table, or to take a recess.
  17. I disagree. Where the rules specifically provide that the motion to adjourn is not privileged and cannot be made when another motion is pending, it would not be in order to raise it as a question of privilege.
  18. What does the approval of the minutes have to do with the price of tea in China (or the proper announcement of the ballot vote)?
  19. Robert's Rules does not use the term "recall" regarding a motion. If no quorum was present when the vote was taken, then the motion did not legitimately fail, regardless of its content. If the chair declared that the motion failed, a member of the board (or of the assembly that the board is subordinate to) may raise a point of order to that effect, if there is some reason to do so. Presumably there was a rationale for making the motion to begin with, so that its adoption would have made some difference. However, it's likely that the motion's failure would not make much difference so that, after the board meeting ends, the situation is practically the same as if the motion had not been made.
  20. To better understand paragraph 23:2(1), it would probably be helpful to also read the entire subsection Conditions Under Which Incidental Motions Take Precedence over, or Yield to, Other Motions (6:18–22), and especially this: "… incidental motions have no rank among themselves and cannot be assigned positions within the order of precedence of motions, although they have individual relationships to that order which are described in the sections dealing with these motions. With the exception of a Division of the Assembly, incidental motions yield to the privileged motions and generally yield to the motion to Lay on the Table, unless the incidental motion arose out of a motion of higher rank than the one to which it would otherwise yield … "In connection with motions that can be incidental to motions of any rank (such as Point of Order, Appeal, Suspend the Rules, Motions Relating to Voting, and certain types of Requests and Inquiries), whenever it is stated that one of these motions yields to “all motions” above a certain rank, the incidental motion nevertheless does not yield to any motion ranking below the one out of which it arises. For example, “A Point of Order yields to the motion to Lay on the Table, and to all privileged motions.” This statement is true without qualification if the point of order is in connection with a motion ranking lower than Lay on the Table (that is, a main motion or any other subsidiary motion); but a point of order arising from a motion to Recess would yield only to the two higher-ranking privileged motions—to Adjourn and to Fix the Time to Which to Adjourn."
  21. Whether the point of order is debatable or not (and in this case it's not), it yields to any privileged motion that is in order at the time according to the order of precedence of motions (based on the other motions that are pending besides the point of order). So unless a privileged motion to adjourn or to fix the time to which to adjourn is already pending (or the assembly is engaged in voting or verifying a vote, or there is some other reason a motion to adjourn is not in order), a privileged motion to adjourn would take precedence over the point of order and would be disposed of first.
×
×
  • Create New...