ordinance valid if rules violated?

[Guest S. Tillery]

What is the practical effect of an assembly passing an ordinance, however the reading of the ordinance was inadvertently not motioned or seconded as required by parlimentary rules?

[David A Foulkes]

So..... it sounds like the topic came up through discussion, and at some point when it seemed like everyone had had their say, the chair put the question to a vote? They did vote, right? Or perhaps the chair employed unanimous consent, wherein no one objected to passing the ordinance? (Sounds a bit like a party game, Pass the Ordinance)

[Guest S. Tillery]

Correct. They did vote. It was motioned and seconded, then was discussed, then tabled, then removed off the table and voted on at a subsequent meeting w/o a new reading and motion and second.

[Rob Elsman]

Correct. They did vote. It was motioned and seconded, then was discussed, then tabled, then removed off the table and voted on at a subsequent meeting w/o a new reading and motion and second.

It's all water under the bridge, now. The motion was adopted. Time to move on.

[Dan Honemann]

It's all water under the bridge, now. The motion was adopted. Time to move on.

Not only that, it appears that the procedure followed was correct. When a motion is taken from the table, it becomes the immediately pending question, without anything more.