Motion that passed wasn't motion that was made....

[Guest Sam]

An incorporated association. It's a fishing/hunting club. Member (Steve) in attendance at general mtg made this motion:

"I motion for an auditing committee with Wayne on it for the purpose of inspecting all records, financial and otherwise, regarding the CCTV system."

The motion was seconded as offered.

Immediately afterward two members raised their hands and said "I volunteer for that committee".

President acknowledged these two members as volunteers. No one objected.

Motion was passed by majority vote.

Member (Steve) o made the initial motion now says two volunteers can't be on the auditing cmte because the motion was for Wayne only to be on the auditing cmte. Is member (Steve) correct that only Wayne can be on the auditing cmte?

Thank you very much for your answers.

[Tim Wynn]

The motion only includes Wayne, so if the motion was adopted as it is written in your post, only Wayne is on the committee. However, it will depend on how the motion was put to a vote, that is, whether or not the volunteers were included in the motion at the time the members voted.

[Guest Sam]

Ok Tim. Got it. Thank you!

[Shmuel Gerber]

The motion only includes Wayne, so if the motion was adopted as it is written in your post, only Wayne is on the committee. However, it will depend on how the motion was put to a vote, that is, whether or not the volunteers were included in the motion at the time the members voted.

I don't think we have enough information to determine that. If the motion was "for an auditing committee with Wayne on it ...", and during the handling of that motion, additional members were named to be on the committee, it's still a committee with Wayne on it.

If Sam has accurately reported what happened, my guess is that Steve is full of hot air.

[Tim Wynn]

I don't think we have enough information to determine that. If the motion was "for an auditing committee with Wayne on it ...", and during the handling of that motion, additional members were named to be on the committee, it's still a committee with Wayne on it.

If Sam has accurately reported what happened, my guess is that Steve is full of hot air.

If additional members were properly named to the committee, I doubt this question would have arisen. In the story Sam tells, no one but Wayne was named to the committee. This is one of those situations where we would have to have been there to know what really happened. An important point for Sam to know is that members can be added to or removed from the committee by the appointing power.

But, for all we know, the bylaws may provide that all committees shall be appointed by the president and Wayne's not even on the committee.

[Trina]

"I motion for an auditing committee with Wayne on it..."

This doesn't appear (to me) to say that Wayne shall be the only member of the committee; if other people volunteered, and no one objected to the additional appointment of those other people before the vote on the committee took place, then what's the problem? It sounds as though the handling of the motion was sloppy, in that the chair probably didn't restate the motion (naming Wayne plus the two volunteers) before the vote. However, it sounds quite possible that the motion was, in effect, amended to include the other two people on the committee (along with Wayne, who is still on the committee, as stated in Steve's original motion).

Steve would have been better off making his point before the vote.

[Tim Wynn]

"I motion for an auditing committee with Wayne on it..."

This doesn't appear (to me) to say that Wayne shall be the only member of the committee; if other people volunteered, and no one objected to the additional appointment of those other people before the vote on the committee took place, then what's the problem?

There would be no problem. But where is the "additional appointment of those other people"?

"President acknowledged these two members as volunteers." A volunteer is an individual declaring his willingness to serve or nominating himself, and in this case apparently when no nominations were called for. The chair acknowledged this act of volunteering, but I see no indication that these volunteers were appointed to the committee.

[Trina]

There would be no problem. But where is the "additional appointment of those other people"?

"President acknowledged these two members as volunteers." A volunteer is an individual declaring his willingness to serve or nominating himself, and in this case apparently when no nominations were called for. The chair acknowledged this act of volunteering, but I see no indication that these volunteers were appointed to the committee.

I see what you mean.

But if the group is in the habit of doing things fairly informally, and if the chair is not good at restating motions before the vote, it's possible that most members of the assembly thought they saw the committee being populated before their eyes, and then voted yes' on the whole shebang. In the end, it is that same assembly that must decide on the validity of Steve's complaint. I agree with your previous comments:

This is one of those situations where we would have to have been there to know what really happened. An important point for Sam to know is that members can be added to or removed from the committee by the appointing power.