SaintCad Posted December 17, 2013 at 03:45 PM Report Share Posted December 17, 2013 at 03:45 PM Maybe I'm missing something and of course these are always issues in small bodies that don't follow the motion -> debate -> vote standard and instead talk about their feelings. It sounds like the member thought his point applied to the current discussion of tithe distribution. If the point the member was making actually applied to the motion (I assume the motion was to pay) then it is part of debate. Otherwise it is out of order as not being germane to the debate. If the chair believes the member is making a new motion e.g "No more than 10% of tithes should be used on discretionary funds." I'm curious under what rule the Chair would not permit such a motion to be made seeing how it was not a special meeting. What am I missing? What am I missing that makes it a bigger deal than that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted December 17, 2013 at 04:09 PM Report Share Posted December 17, 2013 at 04:09 PM If the chair believes the member is making a new motion e.g "No more than 10% of tithes should be used on discretionary funds." I'm curious under what rule the Chair would not permit such a motion to be made seeing how it was not a special meeting. Well, what the OP said was that she requested for the member to wait until the next meeting. If she did, in fact, rule the motion out of order, then I'm curious too. What am I missing? What am I missing that makes it a bigger deal than that? The question is what heading the question should come up under in the order of business at the next meeting. Unless the assembly has a great deal of business to handle at its next meeting, it's not a big deal at all. But that never stopped us from having a lengthy argument on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.