ssantarossa Posted August 5, 2011 at 04:43 PM Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 at 04:43 PM When is it appropriate for the Chair to rule a motion out of order? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted August 5, 2011 at 04:53 PM Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 at 04:53 PM When is it appropriate for the Chair to rule a motion out of order?That is a pretty broad question. A sort of broad answer is that he should rule a motion out of order when some rule is being violated (but he needs to tell you which rule is being broken). Of course if you disagree with that ruling you can Appeal it (RONR pp. 247-252). If you want to give us some more specifics we may be able to give you a more specific answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ssantarossa Posted August 5, 2011 at 05:58 PM Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 at 05:58 PM That is a pretty broad question. A sort of broad answer is that he should rule a motion out of order when some rule is being violated (but he needs to tell you which rule is being broken). Of course if you disagree with that ruling you can Appeal it (RONR pp. 247-252). If you want to give us some more specifics we may be able to give you a more specific answer.It's a pretty complicated situation but the nuts and bolts of it is that it is an item that is beyond the jurisidiction of the Board or goes against a protocol that has been previously adopted by the Board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted August 5, 2011 at 06:12 PM Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 at 06:12 PM Your "either/or" description of the situation can give rise to VERY different answers.Jurisdiction: Check the bylaws to see of the Board is authorized to do what the "item" describes.Protocol: It is perfectly proper to "amend something previously adopted" - i.e., the protocol that the board previously adopted - or simply "suspend the rules" (that the Board adopted) and do the item. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ssantarossa Posted August 5, 2011 at 06:44 PM Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 at 06:44 PM Your "either/or" description of the situation can give rise to VERY different answers.Jurisdiction: Check the bylaws to see of the Board is authorized to do what the "item" describes.Protocol: It is perfectly proper to "amend something previously adopted" - i.e., the protocol that the board previously adopted - or simply "suspend the rules" (that the Board adopted) and do the item.Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted August 6, 2011 at 10:30 PM Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 at 10:30 PM Protocol: It is perfectly proper to "amend something previously adopted" - i.e., the protocol that the board previously adopted - or simply "suspend the rules" (that the Board adopted) and do the item.Well, yes, but on the other hand, it's not proper to just do the protocol-violating action without using ASPA, and Suspend the Rules can't be applied to protocols which have application outside a meeting context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted August 6, 2011 at 11:39 PM Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 at 11:39 PM I wonder... If a "protocol" applies both within and without a meeting, could not the "in-meeting" portion be suspended do do something in the meeting. But, I suppose, if the "something" extended in effect outside the meeting then it would not be proper to suspend. So I guess ASPA is the proper route to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.