Call for the question

[Guest Jan Cousins]

When our board is in the midst of a discussion and one of the directors says " Call for the question" that director

says that the discussion must stop and a vote be taken. I thought that I once say something on this forum about this.

I thought it was that the majority of directors must want the discussion to end, or it continues. I have lookied an cannot

locate that post. When the vote is taken is it not just a majority of votes for it to pass. In another post it said it takes

2/3 after the question is called. The majority of our board would be 5 but 2/3 would be 6. Thanks for the help, I am

anticipating that I will need it at our meeting on Tuesday.

[Bruce Lages]

Look at FAQ #11 on this website, and if you want more information, look at RONR, 11th ed., pp. 197-209 for the motion for the previous question. The effect of this motion is to immediately end debate and bring the pending motion to a vote. But after the motion for the previous question is made and seconded, it takes a 2/3 vote to adopt it. Only after this motion is adopted do you then immediately vote on the pending question.

[Sean Hunt]

When our board is in the midst of a discussion and one of the directors says " Call for the question" that director

says that the discussion must stop and a vote be taken. I thought that I once say something on this forum about this.

I thought it was that the majority of directors must want the discussion to end, or it continues. I have lookied an cannot

locate that post. When the vote is taken is it not just a majority of votes for it to pass. In another post it said it takes

2/3 after the question is called. The majority of our board would be 5 but 2/3 would be 6. Thanks for the help, I am

anticipating that I will need it at our meeting on Tuesday.

To 'call the question' is to make the motion for the Previous Question, which is undebateable and unamendable, and requires a two-thirds vote for adoption. If the motion is adopted, debate ends and the motion is immediately put to the vote. See RONR 11th ed. pp. 197-209.

[Matt Schafer]

Another key detail that is often misunderstood: To move the Previous Question, a member must have the floor. He may not blurt it out while another member is speaking or when the chair has not assigned the floor to him.

[Guest Edgar]

I have looked an cannot locate that post

Look at FAQ #11 . . .

Which can be found here.

The majority of our board would be 5 but 2/3 would be 6.

Note that the requirement is based on the number of members present and voting, not the total number of members on the board or even the number that are present. So, with some members absent or abstaining, a vote of, say, 4-1 would constitute a two-thirds vote.

[Trina]

Another key detail that is often misunderstood: To move the Previous Question, a member must have the floor. He may not blurt it out while another member is speaking or when the chair has not assigned the floor to him.

Thanks for pointing this out. Amidst the improper uses of "call the question!!" that I've seen, this point had escaped me. Of course, the assemblies where the chair doesn't understand the true meaning of "call the question" are the same assemblies where the chair is unlikely to keep much order in terms of assigning the floor in the first place .

[Guest Jan Cousins]

Thanks so much for the help. I actually have been reading RONR 11th ed. but still am confused so many times. This forum is great for

extra explainations. I now understand at least this point. Our chair and a couple of board members including myself are new to the board world and we

are always being told by other board members what the rules are. Fortunatly as we work our way through the RONR system we are seeing that

there are a lot of changes to be made.

[Guest met00]

Interesting discussion.

Here is a twist.

Five members. The first member to speak on the agenda item just wants the vote done with. He makes a motion to vote. It is seconded. He still has the floor and calls for the question.

My understanding is that at that point all debate should stop (even though none has happened) and there should be a vote of the motion and the second.

Is this a correct interpretation of RRO?

[Daniel H. Honemann]

Interesting discussion.

Here is a twist.

Five members. The first member to speak on the agenda item just wants the vote done with. He makes a motion to vote. It is seconded. He still has the floor and calls for the question.

My understanding is that at that point all debate should stop (even though none has happened) and there should be a vote of the motion and the second.

Is this a correct interpretation of RRO?

I'd suggest that you start a new topic with this new question of yours, and that you try to be a bit clearer as to the facts.