Procedure for clarification

[Guest CindyW]

We will be voting on our annual budget and have included a line item that has never been included before.  We expect a great deal of debate.  The feeling of the Board is that overall our membership will not have an argument with including the line item itself, but may wish to amend the amount budgeted for the line item.  On the other hand, there are some members who adamantly oppose the inclusion of the line item altogether and will likely make a motion to amend, deleting this item from the budget.  If we wanted to clarify what the desire of the membership is in this regard, what would be the best way to handle it?  We don't want the entire line item to be defeated if the complaint is simply with the amount allocated.  We also don't want to set a precedent that would limit this line item from being considered again by future boards if it is defeated this year.  If we have a vote on whether to amend the budget to remove the item, would that tie the hands of future boards? We had a very contentious discussion last month when the subject came up, so we anticipate having to call the question.  Thanks for your input!

[Guest Nancy N,]

I'll start with a couple of points here....

.... what would be the best way to handle it?  ...

 

No, I'm not starting with that!

 

... We also don't want to set a precedent that would limit this line item from being considered again by future boards if it is defeated this year.  If we have a vote on whether to amend the budget to remove the item, would that tie the hands of future boards? ...

 

No, that's not a problem.  It doesn't tie any hands, even for this year.

 

... We had a very contentious discussion last month when the subject came up, so we anticipate having to call the question. ...

 

What are you talking about here, CindyW?!

[Guest Guest]

I was trying to be brief but this is a complicated situation.  So here goes....

 

A motion was presented at last month's general meeting to pay a stipend to some individuals with close ties to our organization.  The debate over this became very contentious and a bit out of hand.  Several people were completely opposed to the idea.  However, when the vote was taken, it passed overwhelmingly.

 

At the same meeting our proposed budget for next year was presented for consideration and will be voted on at this month's general meeting.  That budget introduces a line item that will provide for this stipend again next year, but it will be part of the budget.  Due to last month's proceedings, we anticipate another passionate debate (but hopefully one that will be better managed this time by the President.)

 

What I'm wanting to know is if there is a way for us to interrupt debate to clarify whether the membership is concerned about the amount of the line item or if they dislike the line item altogether.  We suspect, based on last month's vote on a stipend for this year, that if the majority of the membership has objections at all it will be to the amount of the stipend for next year and not to providing a stipend at all.

 

Our concern is that someone will immediately make a motion that the line item be removed altogether and that the membership will vote it down without considering the option of a motion to simply decrease the appropriated amount.  How do we as a Board ensure that an amendment to change the amount is considered in that situation?  Is that done by simply raising the topic during debate?

 

I guess I'm confused because changing the amount would also have to be completed by a motion and corresponding vote.  I'm envisioning two conflicting motions on the floor, but not sure that's even proper.

 

Hope this clarifies a bit.  Thanks so much for your reply!

[Guest Nancy N.]

Guest-Guest (or CindyW, if you want to go back to being formal).

 

First ... what did you mean, call the question??!?

 

Second.  You say:  "A motion was presented ... to pay a stipend to some individuals ...  However, when the vote was taken, it passed overwhelmingly."

 

So, were the checks sent?  Or what did you pass overwhelmingly -- a resolution to give a stipend, but without necessary details, like how much, or to whom, or when?

 

Or what?

 

Either way, unless I'm badly missing something, in which case why should today be any different, any finishing up that is necessary regarding this year's stipend distribution is probably quick-and easy handling of details.  Your minority has lost this one, and probably cannot effectively impede it, assuming they have the low character to try.  So I don't see what the problem is, unless it's that those (few) members who are vehemently against giving any stipend will be upset.  But tsk, they're grownups:  they can't always have it their way.  If they're going to cry, send them over my house and we can eat ice cream and watch Lifetime movies on TV, or maybe find Fifty First Dates wich I keep missing, that Barrymore girl is just adorable, isn't she?.  If they're still sulking next week we can eat pizza and drink beer again and maybe they'll show The Hobbit, I keep missing it, I bet after three hours of that, they'll be amenable to giving a little piffling nugatory stipend to those yeomen heroes and heroines who have more than earned it.  Maybe we can find a zombie movie too.

 

Now, as I understand it, the budget is a proposal, up for consideration at the coming meeting:  hopefully, to be adopted in some form, perhaps after vigorous amendment.  This proposed budget does include the line-item for the stipend, so its opponents will move to amend the budget by striking out the line for the stipends.  Why is this a problem?  Unless the population of the assembly drastically changes from meeting to meeting, those who overwhelmingly passed the stipend motion last time can now overwhelmingly defeat the proposal to delete the budget line for the stipend.  Anyone can then move to amend the amount of the stipend, perhaps by proposing creating a blank, with various amounts of money proposed to fill the blank, and the assembly can choose the amount they want.

 

But this concerns me:  

 

... What I'm wanting to know is if there is a way for us to interrupt debate to clarify whether the membership is concerned about the amount of the line item or if they dislike the line item altogether.  We suspect, based on last month's vote on a stipend for this year, that if the majority of the membership has objections at all it will be to the amount of the stipend for next year and not to providing a stipend at all.

 

Our concern is that someone will immediately make a motion that the line item be removed altogether and that the membership will vote it down without considering the option of a motion to simply decrease the appropriated amount.  How do we as a Board ensure that an amendment to change the amount is considered in that situation?  Is that done by simply raising the topic during debate?

 

I (and others) are always mindful of boards' having the alarming habit of getting more than minimally involved in membership meetings, as a board.  Unless all, or many, of you board members are not actually regular members of the organization (it's uncommon but not rare, and it's allowed unless your bylaws prohibit it), you can participate in the membership meeting just as ordinary (or extraordinary, going by the stellar CindyW and Guest_Guest, but you know what I mean) members.  Which, really, you are. -- except maybe for the president and secretary, who likely perform those offices at membership meetings.

 

So you don't need to interrupt debate to clarify.  ANy of you can get the floor, like anyone else (except me, most of the time, but that's another story -- I'm gettin real tired of being called Sheldon), and make your points about the amounts of the stipends not being set in stone -- or for that matter, maybe not set at all yet.

 

Also, if one of your cadre -- pretty much the board members, right? --  can get the floor before someone on that minority moves to delete the stipend line on the budget, you can maybe offer compromise by one of you immediately moving to amend the budged by reducing the stipend, to such-and-such.  If that mollifies them, you maybe needn't worry at all about a proposed elimination of the stipend line.

 

Also, if one of that minority gets the floor first, and moves to eliminate the stipend line, maybe you can move to amend that proposed amendment to change it to only a reduction in the stipend.  I'm not sure whether that will stand as germane, though.

 

 

As to this --

"I guess I'm confused because changing the amount would also have to be completed by a motion and corresponding vote.  I'm envisioning two conflicting motions on the floor, but not sure that's even proper."

 

A motion to amend a motion that's already pending is not really conflicting, at least in the parliamentary sense, maybe not all this month.  I hope.  So.  

 

Was it something else you were bothered by?

 

______

N. B.  I said "nugatory" because it reminds George of those old days with meetings of the Two Fisted Parliamentarians Club in San Antonio.

[Guest Guest]

Nancy,  Thanks so much!  I only included the information from last month's meeting about the stipend because it informed our idea of how this month's meeting might proceed.  And just fyi, yes, we do have people of that sort of character, but that's neither here nor there since everything we did was done appropriately and monies have been paid.

 

As for this month's budget vote, I had finally gone to bed with the idea that we need to ensure that someone, either one of us or someone else who is in agreement, points out that the amount of the stipend can be altered.

 

But more precisely the information about making a motion that the motion to delete be changed to simply include a change in the amount of the stipend is exactly what I was looking for. 

 

Oh, and as for "call the question," that is the terminology we use for "Order the Previous Question."  Last month's meeting went on and on and on and...well, you understand, with nothing new being said.  In order to keep from being there forever, we suspect we may have to "call the question" to get a vote in at all. 

 

Anyway, thanks for your input and have a happy day!

 

Cindy

[George Mervosh]

 

But more precisely the information about making a motion that the motion to delete be changed to simply include a change in the amount of the stipend is exactly what I was looking for. 

 

 

If I understand what you want to do here, I don't think that's proper. RONR (11th ed.), p. 138, #4

[Bruce Lages]

I don't think you have an either/or situation here. If an amendment is made to delete this line item from the budget, and it is defeated, then I believe it would be in order to propose another amendment to change the amount in that line item.

 

Of course, if the amendment to delete that line item is passed, then that's the end of it, at least for now.

[Guest Nancy N.]

(Cindy, mind what George Mervosh and Bruce Lages said.  Remember, I had my doubts (although I didn't realize what it was about till George reminded me).  I didn't provide you with information, actually -- it was a guess.)