jcolletteiii

Not my motion, not my senate, not my circus, or my monkeys. Your reading is close. Motion A was adopted two years ago, and work toward implementing it had already begun. This actually occurred before my tenure as president. Motion B is a competing model to motion A. There was relatively little hope of motion B passing, but because adopted motion A was already, well, in-motion, and we could not have two of this particular kind of model operating simultaneousely, this year's senate held a vote to suspend implementation of Motion A to consider Motion B (because we can only have one of these models in operation at one time). That motion to postpone started out as having an automatic expiration date (so as to be after the vote on Motion B). But I can't figure out from reading the minutes how it happened, but the motion to postpone was somehow amended to take out the automatic expiration, and it became a potpone indefinitely - which did pass. I suspect this motion was out of order because implementation of the adopted Motion A had already begun, but I am not sure about this. Long story short, motion B was considered and rejected. However, the body then reconsider the postponment of passed Motion A, and that motion to reconsider failed. Sorry if I was unclear above. I hope I have the situation more clearly outlined now.

Hey, previous faculty senate president here, and I have a question on previously ratified motions. Let's say a previous senate voted to adopt a measure, but because of the complexity of that measure, there was a timetabled implementation required. Implementation of that approved action had begun a year ago by a committee. Now, let's suppose that a competing motion was proposed by an entirely different faculty senate body (2 years after the first motion was adopted)... Can the current faculty senate vote to rescind the previously approved motion to consider the new competing motion, and what would the pathway to such a pause or rescind look like? I've found some information, but not enough. Hopefully some parliamentarian here can help detangle this one! Please advise!