Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Motion Amendments


SptbgLawyer

Recommended Posts

Main motion is on the floor and is seconded; during discussion, the main motion is amended (and seconded), but no vote on the amendment is taken.  The amendment is subsequently amended (and seconded), but no vote is taken.  In the end, the Chair states that the vote is on the "amendment, amendment" and then restates the main motion as amended (then the vote takes place).  Technically, this appears to be inappropriate, but does the Chair's handling in the end by stating they are voting on the "amendment, amendment" and restating the main motion as amended cure this deficiency?  Or have they only truly voted on the second amendment?  And what cure is there - a complete do over?  (sorry this is confusing)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's unclear what really happened, but in the end, the chair puts the question on the secondary amendment, the primary amendment (or primary amendment as amended), then the main motion (or main motion as amended).

 

Now there's pauses in there for debate of the secondary amendment, the primary amendment, and the main motion, and there could have been further primary or secondary amendments made, but in the end if he properly took a vote on all 3, in their proper order and format, all is well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Main motion is on the floor and is seconded; during discussion, the main motion is amended (and seconded), but no vote on the amendment is taken.  The amendment is subsequently amended (and seconded), but no vote is taken.  In the end, the Chair states that the vote is on the "amendment, amendment" and then restates the main motion as amended (then the vote takes place).  Technically, this appears to be inappropriate, but does the Chair's handling in the end by stating they are voting on the "amendment, amendment" and restating the main motion as amended cure this deficiency?  Or have they only truly voted on the second amendment?  And what cure is there - a complete do over?  (sorry this is confusing)

 

I concur with Mr. Mervosh regarding what should have happened.

 

It appears that what did happen (correct me if I am wrong) is that the chair put the question on the main motion as if both amendments had been adopted, and the assembly then voted on that motion. Since that's what the chair stated, that's what the assembly voted on. This is, of course, highly improper, but it's too late to correct the chair's error now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Main motion is on the floor and is seconded; during discussion, the main motion is amended (and seconded), but no vote on the amendment is taken.  The amendment is subsequently amended (and seconded), but no vote is taken.  In the end, the Chair states that the vote is on the "amendment, amendment" and then restates the main motion as amended (then the vote takes place).  Technically, this appears to be inappropriate, but does the Chair's handling in the end by stating they are voting on the "amendment, amendment" and restating the main motion as amended cure this deficiency?  Or have they only truly voted on the second amendment?  And what cure is there - a complete do over?  (sorry this is confusing)

 

If the chair said, "the vote is on the 'amendment, amendment'", and no member said, "What on earth are you talking about?", then it's hard to think of what cure might be had. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...