Seriatim Procedure

[Guest Casey]

In an elected city council following RONR, a very long, complicated resolution is referred by committee. When the matter is taken up for formal consideration by the full council, two members introduce a substitute resolution which is fundamentally different than the original committee report. That substitute motion--which contains five separate paragraphs (provisions)--is adopted. Next, a member moves to consider the substitute "by paragraph." Each of the five paragraphs are then taken up individually, and a series of amendments and further substitutes are offered to perfect the various provisions. After each of the paragraphs is accepted by vote as being in "final form," the council president announces that the original recommendation, as substituted, and as further amended, has been adopted. There is confusion among the members about what actually has happened and what is now before the council. As clerk, I advise that a final vote on the full resolution is in order, citing that seriatim consideration allowed for perfection of the individual components of the resolution, and that now that the parts have been perfected, a final vote on the resolution (as substituted) is the immediately pending question. The vice-president of council challenges my opinion and calls on the city attorney to render an opinion. The city attorney indicates a final vote is not needed since the question was separated and voted upon by parts.

Help...who was right in this case? I'm fairly positive that my advice was correct based on a reading of RONR which indicates that seriatim consideration is a convenience to perfect a proposed motion, but that a final vote is required once all amendments have been offered on the individual parts and, after ward, on the full document as perfected. Keep in mind, the original resolution was not "divided," but rather the motion was to consider each paragraph (seriatim). So...thoughts or feedback?

Thanks everyone!!

[Rob Elsman]

In an elected city council following RONR, a very long, complicated resolution is referred by committee. When the matter is taken up for formal consideration by the full council, two members introduce a substitute resolution which is fundamentally different than the original committee report. That substitute motion--which contains five separate paragraphs (provisions)--is adopted. Next, a member moves to consider the substitute "by paragraph." Each of the five paragraphs are then taken up individually, and a series of amendments and further substitutes are offered to perfect the various provisions. After each of the paragraphs is accepted by vote as being in "final form," the council president announces that the original recommendation, as substituted, and as further amended, has been adopted. There is confusion among the members about what actually has happened and what is now before the council. As clerk, I advise that a final vote on the full resolution is in order, citing that seriatim consideration allowed for perfection of the individual components of the resolution, and that now that the parts have been perfected, a final vote on the resolution (as substituted) is the immediately pending question. The vice-president of council challenges my opinion and calls on the city attorney to render an opinion. The city attorney indicates a final vote is not needed since the question was separated and voted upon by parts.

Help...who was right in this case? I'm fairly positive that my advice was correct based on a reading of RONR which indicates that seriatim consideration is a convenience to perfect a proposed motion, but that a final vote is required once all amendments have been offered on the individual parts and, after ward, on the full document as perfected. Keep in mind, the original resolution was not "divided," but rather the motion was to consider each paragraph (seriatim). So...thoughts or feedback?

Thanks everyone!!

If I understand the facts right, the motion to consider the substitute seriatim was made after the substitute was adopted. If that's the case, then the motion to consider seriatim was out of order, since the amendment was no longer before the assembly.

[Shmuel Gerber]

If I understand the facts right, the motion to consider the substitute seriatim was made after the substitute was adopted. If that's the case, then the motion to consider seriatim was out of order, since the amendment was no longer before the assembly.

Then the motion to Consider Seriatim was probably applied to the main motion as amended (i.e., to the text of the substitute). Nothing wrong with that.

[Rob Elsman]

Then the motion to Consider Seriatim was probably applied to the main motion as amended (i.e., to the text of the substitute). Nothing wrong with that.

If that were true, further motions to amend by substitute would have been out of order, since only amendments to add are in order.

[Shmuel Gerber]

After each of the paragraphs is accepted by vote as being in "final form," the council president announces that the original recommendation, as substituted, and as further amended, has been adopted.

Where the procedure went awry was taking a vote on each paragraph. That was not the correct way of handling a motion being considered seriatim. But since a vote was taken on each paragraph, why do you want another vote to be taken? What do you think the effect of the vote "accepting" each paragraph as being in "final form" was?

[Shmuel Gerber]

If that were true, further motions to amend by substitute would have been out of order, since only amendments to add are in order.

My apologies, Rob. You are correct about that. But it seems like that is what was done, even though there was something wrong with it.

[Rob Elsman]

My apologies, Rob. You are correct about that. But it seems like that is what was done, even though there was something wrong with it.

I could be wrong, but I think what's missing is a motion to reconsider the adoption of the substitute. However, even had such a motion to reconsider been adopted, secondary motions to substitute a paragraph for another would have been out of order, since the only amendments that would have been in order during the paragraph-by-paragraph part of the consideration would have been motions to amend words, not paragraphs.

[Guest Casey]

#1. The substitute to the original resolution was adopted--which was the first vote. This put the substitute, as the new main motion, in front of the council. It opened the new main motion (the first substitute) to further perfection.

#2. Then the motion to consider by paragraph was made and accepted, without objection, by the president. At that point, the five paragraphs in the substitute (new main motion) were each taken up and perfected individually. Votes were taken on each component part because that is the long-standing practice, even though not technically required by RONR. If memory serves, there were a total of about five or six amendments then offered covering each of the five paragraphs.

#3. After each of the individual paragraphs had been perfected, I hold that the original resolution, as substituted and further perfected, was before the council in final form for consideration, in case there may have been further questions, concerns, or amendments offered. Furthermore, because the resolution in question was on a highly sensitive, controversial subject matter, one which the mayor had already threatened to veto, I advised that the council should take a final vote on the "package" of paragraphs, as perfected, that now were before the council.

I should point out that--after the meeting adjourned--the city attorney did concur with me, pointing out that my advice was correct after consulting RONR. But, he said that his advice was based on the acceptance that the council understood what was being voted on and so there was no need for the final vote. Interestingly, however, one member (at least) has already stated that he was unclear on what was actually voted on in the end.

Given these facts, how would you have advised in that situation??

[Rob Elsman]

#1. The substitute to the original resolution was adopted--which was the first vote. This put the substitute, as the new main motion, in front of the council. It opened the new main motion (the first substitute) to further perfection.

#2. Then the motion to consider by paragraph was made and accepted, without objection, by the president. At that point, the five paragraphs in the substitute (new main motion) were each taken up and perfected individually. Votes were taken on each component part because that is the long-standing practice, even though not technically required by RONR. If memory serves, there were a total of about five or six amendments then offered covering each of the five paragraphs.

#3. After each of the individual paragraphs had been perfected, I hold that the original resolution, as substituted and further perfected, was before the council in final form for consideration, in case there may have been further questions, concerns, or amendments offered. Furthermore, because the resolution in question was on a highly sensitive, controversial subject matter, one which the mayor had already threatened to veto, I advised that the council should take a final vote on the "package" of paragraphs, as perfected, that now were before the council.

I should point out that--after the meeting adjourned--the city attorney did concur with me, pointing out that my advice was correct after consulting RONR. But, he said that his advice was based on the acceptance that the council understood what was being voted on and so there was no need for the final vote. Interestingly, however, one member (at least) has already stated that he was unclear on what was actually voted on in the end.

Given these facts, how would you have advised in that situation??

After the substitute was adopted, the only amendments that are in order are those of the forms that add words or paragraphs. Further motions to amend by substitution would have been out of order without a reconsideration of the adoption of the first substitute.

[Josh Martin]

After the substitute was adopted, the only amendments that are in order are those of the forms that add words or paragraphs. Further motions to amend by substitution would have been out of order without a reconsideration of the adoption of the first substitute.

I agree with Mr. Elsman, and as has been previously noted, a vote should not be taken on each paragraph. The council's "longstanding practice" is in conflict with RONR and should no longer be followed. After no further amendments are offered for a paragraph, the chair moves on to the next paragraph. After all paragraphs have been perfected in this manner, the entire motion is open to further amendment. Finally, a vote is taken on the motion as a whole. I would have quietly informed the chair of these facts as the situations arose.

If, for some reason, the chair disregarded my advice during consideration of the motion (or I was taking a nap) and the situation did play out as described, I would still advise that a final opportunity for amendments be made and that a final vote be taken on the resolution, since although the individual paragraphs had been voted on as "final," members may have wished to add paragraphs.

At this point, of course, it's much too late to raise questions about the procedure. These are just points to keep in mind for the future.