jstackpo Posted February 25, 2012 at 12:34 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 12:34 AM There are two new examples in the book - p. 309-310 - one of changing Amend Something Previously Adopted (ASPA) to Rescind, the other of changing Rescind to ASPA.It seems to me that the first (ASAP to Rescind) absolutely must destroy any notice given about the proposed amendment since rescinding the whole thing is certainly beyond the scope of proposing some specific amendment to the original motion, no matter what the amendment was. It is automatic.And the second example (Rescind to ASPA) quite likely would do so also, although this might depend on the exact wording of the ASPA motion.Do you experts (and amateurs, for that matter) agree?The book doesn't mention this, but I think it should for completeness, next time around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted February 25, 2012 at 12:49 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 12:49 AM Do you experts (and amateurs, for that matter) agree?Subject to the presentation of a counter-example, I'm willing to agree that a motion to Rescind will always fall beyond the scope of any notice to Amend Something Previously Adopted. But I'm not so sure that the opposite is necessarily "quite likely". To use our favorite example of raising the dues, notice of a motion to Rescind the motion that raised the dues from $10 to $25 creates an effective scope between those two amounts, within which an motion to Amend could be made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted February 25, 2012 at 01:35 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 01:35 AM Subject to the presentation of a counter-example, I'm willing to agree that a motion to Rescind will always fall beyond the scope of any notice to Amend Something Previously Adopted. But I'm not so sure that the opposite is necessarily "quite likely". To use our favorite example of raising the dues, notice of a motion to Rescind the motion that raised the dues from $10 to $25 creates an effective scope between those two amounts, within which an motion to Amend could be made.Let's say dues had been $25 since the organization was formed. In January, an ASPA motion to lower the dues to $10 is adopted. In February, with notice given, an ASPA motion is moved to raise dues to $30. Would the substituted motion to Rescind the January motion, returning the dues to $25, fall within the scope of notice given for the ASPA motion to raise dues from $10 to $30? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted February 25, 2012 at 01:38 AM Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 01:38 AM Agreed about Edgar's "effective scope" (#2), but here is an example of "Rescind to ASPA" to that, it looks to me, would exceed scope:First Meeting:Main Motion: Buy a teapot for $50.00 or less. Adopted.Second Meeting:"Bring Again" Motion: Rescind the "Buy a teapot..." motion.Amend the pending "Bring Again" motion by substitution to read "Move to amend the 'Buy a Teapot...' motion by striking out '$50' and inserting '100' ".If I found out later (because I didn't go to the second meeting) that the choice of not buying the pot after all vs. buying the teapot - that is what the Rescind vote would decide - was changed to allowing for the buying of a more expensive one, I'd claim that was surely beyond the notice scope.If the amendment was adopted, and the new ASPA was adopted by 2/3, I'd just grumble and resolve never to miss another meeting.And if it was Russell's Teapot:(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot) you couldn't tell if it was there or not.Edit: The link didn't work right; search for Teapot on the page that the link goes to.Or copy/paste the link as you see it, less the "(...)". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:04 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:04 AM If I found out later (because I didn't go to the second meeting) that the choice of not buying the pot after all vs. buying the teapot - that is what the Rescind vote would decide - was changed to allowing for the buying of a more expensive one, I'd claim that was surely beyond the notice scope.I don't think anyone will claim that a motion to amend will never exceed the effective scope of a notice to rescind, I'm just questioning characterizing the probability as "quite likely". Maybe it is; maybe it isn't.9qn63h Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:08 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:08 AM Subject to the presentation of a counter-example, I'm willing to agree that a motion to Rescind will always fall beyond the scope of any notice to Amend Something Previously Adopted. But I'm not so sure that the opposite is necessarily "quite likely". To use our favorite example of raising the dues, notice of a motion to Rescind the motion that raised the dues from $10 to $25 creates an effective scope between those two amounts, within which an motion to Amend could be made.i don't believe you can Rescind the motion that amended dues from $10 to $25, since that motion itself was a motion to ASPA, which amended the previously existing motion, and it is that motion, as amended, that you would now be proposing to amend. It wouldn't be a Recision of the motion that previously amended it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:10 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:10 AM Would the substituted motion to Rescind the January motion, returning the dues to $25, fall within the scope of notice given for the ASPA motion to raise dues from $10 to $30?I think so. I think the scope is bounded by the status quo (in this instance, $10) and the proposal (in this instance, $30). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:11 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:11 AM ... here is an example of "Rescind to ASPA" to that, it looks to me, would exceed scope:How about notice of intent to dissolve the organization being amended to raising the dues. I would say that is beyond the scope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:15 AM Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:15 AM Let's say dues had been $25 since the organization was formed. In January, an ASPA motion to lower the dues to $10 is adopted. In February, with notice given, an ASPA motion is moved to raise dues to $30. Would the substituted motion to Rescind the January motion, returning the dues to $25, fall within the scope of notice given for the ASPA motion to raise dues from $10 to $30?This one makes my head hurt, but...Look at what is going on in Feb: An ASPA is moved to raise dues. This motion refers directly to the text of the document that sets the dues, at $10.Then a Substitute is proposed to rescind a January motion. But the January motion has been all carried out -- the dues have been set at $10.00 in the controling document. Not proper to attempt to rescind something already accomplished.This point has nothing to do with scope, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:26 AM Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:26 AM I suspect this debate bolsters the argument in (shh..., don't tell Dan) "some other authority" that "Rescind" and "ASPA" should be considered as completely separate motions, that cannot be transmogrified from one form to another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:26 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:26 AM Then a Substitute is proposed to rescind a January motion. But the January motion has been all carried out -- the dues have been set at $10.00 in the controlling document. Not proper to attempt to rescind something already accomplished.Or . . . the establishment of the amount of dues has a continuing effect so the motion adopting it is therefore subject to a motion to rescind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:50 AM Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 02:50 AM Or . . . the establishment of the amount of dues has a continuing effect so the motion adopting it is therefore subject to a motion to rescind.Yeah... maybe. But I would view "changing the dues" as changing the number in the document that specifies the dues, and that was done as soon as the change motion was adopted. Collecting the dues is the "continuing" chore. If you allowed the "change dues" motion to be rescinded, would you have to refund all the (new) dues collected since the "change" notice was adopted, and the "rescind" was adopted. I would think a refund would require a separate motion.But here is a counter example to my (not particularly well founded) assertion that "Rescind to ASAP" "quite likely" destroys a scope notice.Given: a rather complex statement of a policy, for example, with many parts.Initial "Bring Back" Motion: I move to Rescind the entire policy.Amend, by substitution, that "B-B" motion to read "Strike out paragraphs 1, 4, and 57 from the [i told you it was complex!] policy statement.No scope problem there. I suspect that that general pattern would allow many "Rescinds" to turn into "partial rescinds" without scope difficulties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:03 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:03 AM i don't believe you can Rescind the motion that amended dues from $10 to $25, since that motion itself was a motion to ASPA, which amended the previously existing motion, and it is that motion, as amended, that you would now be proposing to amend. It wouldn't be a Recision of the motion that previously amended it.So, as I understand it, over the years as the dues (originally set at $1) have been increased, each and every ASPA motion was applied against the original main motion (adopted so many years ago and placed in the founding documents) to set the dues at the original amount of $1. That is to say, the second ASPA motion to increase the dues (from $2 to $5) was not applied to the first ASPA motion (from $1 to $2) prior to that, but the original main motion to set the dues amount. Therefore the only application of the motion to Rescind against the amount of the dues would actually eliminate the dues altogether, not "undo" the last increase. About right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:14 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:14 AM So, as I understand it, over the years as the dues (originally set at $1) have been increased, each and every ASPA motion was applied against the original main motion (adopted so many years ago and placed in the founding documents) to set the dues at the original amount of $1. That is to say, the second ASPA motion to increase the dues (from $2 to $5) was not applied to the first ASPA motion (from $1 to $2) prior to that, but the original main motion to set the dues amount. Therefore the only application of the motion to Rescind against the amount of the dues would actually eliminate the dues altogether, not "undo" the last increase. About right?A motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted cannot be applied to an adopted motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted any more than a motion to Rescind can be applied to an adopted motion to Rescind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:16 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:16 AM A motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted cannot be applied to an adopted motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted ...Meaning each motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted is applied to the original main motion, adopted however long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:18 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:18 AM Let's say dues had been $25 since the organization was formed. In January, an ASPA motion to lower the dues to $10 is adopted. In February, with notice given, an ASPA motion is moved to raise dues to $30. Would the substituted motion to Rescind the January motion, returning the dues to $25, fall within the scope of notice given for the ASPA motion to raise dues from $10 to $30?No, but the amendment to raise dues to $25 is within the scope.See posts #6 and #14 of this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:20 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:20 AM Meaning each motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted is applied to the original main motion, adopted however long ago.Yes.A motion to Rescind/ASPA does not have continuing force and effect. It is carried out upon adoption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 25, 2012 at 04:17 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 04:17 AM It seems to me that the first (ASAP to Rescind) absolutely must destroy any notice given about the proposed amendment since rescinding the whole thing is certainly beyond the scope of proposing some specific amendment to the original motion, no matter what the amendment was. It is automatic.How about notice of intent to amend the standing rule "That a person is not eligible to participate in the car show, unless he owns at least three antique cars" by striking "three" and inserting "zero" in its place? This allows for a scope from zero to three. Would Rescind really be out of that scope in every imaginable situation? It's not a perfect example, but I'm sleepy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted February 25, 2012 at 12:15 PM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 12:15 PM There are two new examples in the book - p. 309-310 - one of changing Amend Something Previously Adopted (ASPA) to Rescind, the other of changing Rescind to ASPA.It seems to me that the first (ASAP to Rescind) absolutely must destroy any notice given about the proposed amendment since rescinding the whole thing is certainly beyond the scope of proposing some specific amendment to the original motion, no matter what the amendment was. It is automatic.And the second example (Rescind to ASPA) quite likely would do so also, although this might depend on the exact wording of the ASPA motion.Do you experts (and amateurs, for that matter) agree?The book doesn't mention this, but I think it should for completeness, next time around.You're supposed to read SDC 6 for these motions in its entirety, not just the first two sentences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted February 25, 2012 at 12:27 PM Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 12:27 PM Agreed with Tim in #18, sort of. The setup of negative phrasing in the main motion clouds this a bit.If the (original) main motion was phrased in an all positive manner as"A person must own at least three cars to be eligible to participate..." this mean exactly the same thing as the (partly) negative motion.An ASPA to strike "three" and insert "zero" would be fine, but to amend the ASPA to rescind the whole (one sentence) rule would have a scope problem as adopting that would leave no eligibility criteria at all, and nobody could participate.None of this scope violation business makes the "ASPA to Rescind" sequence out of order, just changes the vote threshold required for adoption (unless you are dealing with bylaws). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.