Kim Goldsworthy Posted March 8, 2013 at 06:54 PM Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 at 06:54 PM A motion to alter the fixed hour of adjournment is classified as a main motion.A main motion can only be moved when no other motion is pending.What if the assembly wishes to alter the fixed hour of adjournment WHILE A MAIN MOTION IS PENDING?What the proper procedure for the following scenario?• An agenda has been adopted. The hour of adjournment is five o'clock.• At 4:59 p.m., the assembly is engaged in the midst of a resolution.• At 5:00 p.m., the chair's timing device rings, and the chair announces that time has expired on this agenda item. • The chair, sensing that the assembly wishes to dispose of the pending agenda item by voting on it, does not immediately adjourn the meeting, but instead awaits an appropriate motion.Q. If the assembly wishes to prevent adjournment at five o'clock for the purposes of completing this last agendized item, say, to allow maybe five more minutes, then what is the most proper parliamentary action?(e.g,. Amend Something Previously Adopted? Suspend the Rules? Extend the Limits of Debate?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted March 8, 2013 at 07:27 PM Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 at 07:27 PM It's handled as setting aside the orders of the day. RONR (11th ed.), p. 241, l. 1-4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted March 8, 2013 at 07:29 PM Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 at 07:29 PM They use a motion made at that time specifically to reschedule the adjournment; it requires two-thirds and is undebateable. See p. 374, ll. 17-25. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Goldsworthy Posted March 8, 2013 at 08:45 PM Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 at 08:45 PM They use a motion made at that time specifically to reschedule the adjournment; it requires two-thirds and is undebateable. See p. 374, ll. 17-25.Exellent. -- You have found the conflicting rule I had remembered, but could not find and cite in my original post.Review:Page 374 (under ORDER OF BUSINESS) implies that a motion to alter the hour of adjournment can be moved when the chair announces the arrival of that hour.But, page 234, (under ADJOURN) lines 23-27, says that a motion to alter the hour of adjournment cannot be made when a question is pending, since it would be main motion, by definition.So, when five o'clock arrives, right in the middle of a heated resolution, then which rule (which page) prevails? Page 374?Page 234?What ought to happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted March 8, 2013 at 11:45 PM Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 at 11:45 PM Exellent. -- You have found the conflicting rule I had remembered, but could not find and cite in my original post.Review:Page 374 (under ORDER OF BUSINESS) implies that a motion to alter the hour of adjournment can be moved when the chair announces the arrival of that hour.But, page 234, (under ADJOURN) lines 23-27, says that a motion to alter the hour of adjournment cannot be made when a question is pending, since it would be main motion, by definition.So, when five o'clock arrives, right in the middle of a heated resolution, then which rule (which page) prevails?Page 374?Page 234?What ought to happen?The rule on pg. 374 prevails. Specific trumps general. It is not in order to reschedule a preset time to adjourn when a motion is pending, unless the time to adjourn has arrived, in which case it may be rescheduled by a 2/3 vote without debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted March 10, 2013 at 01:33 AM Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 at 01:33 AM The rule on pg. 374 prevails. Specific trumps general. It is not in order to reschedule a preset time to adjourn when a motion is pending, unless the time to adjourn has arrived, in which case it may be rescheduled by a 2/3 vote without debate.I don't agree. I think it would be perfectly in order to offer a motion to Suspend the Rules and reschedule the time of adjournment, if there is a valid reason for doing so while other business is pending, even before the time for adjournment has been reached. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted March 10, 2013 at 03:02 AM Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 at 03:02 AM I don't agree. I think it would be perfectly in order to offer a motion to Suspend the Rules and reschedule the time of adjournment, if there is a valid reason for doing so while other business is pending, even before the time for adjournment has been reached.The problem I would have is the motion to Suspend the Rules interrupting someone who has the floor. If a member took the floor at 4:59 and moved "that the rules be suspended to permit the assembly to continue in session until the pending main motion is disposed of," that would clearly be in order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted March 10, 2013 at 03:55 AM Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 at 03:55 AM I don't agree. I think it would be perfectly in order to offer a motion to Suspend the Rules and reschedule the time of adjournment, if there is a valid reason for doing so while other business is pending, even before the time for adjournment has been reached.I concur that a motion to Suspend the Rules would be in order. I didn't intend to exclude it - the purpose of the motion to Suspend the Rules is to do something which would not normally be in order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.