Take off the table

[Guest Ms. Chow]

• Action Item was laid on the table to poll the community for opinion.  Item to come back at the next meeting

To take the item off the table, does it fall under Old Business:

Once you vote to take it off the table, do you open it back up for public comment or does the Board only debate the item and vote?

[Richard Brown]

I'm  assuming that the motion was "laid on the table" at the last meeting, because something laid on the table dies if not brought back before the end of the next meeting.  The  proper motion probably would have been to postpone to a definite time (the next meeting) or to refer it to a committee, but for your purposes, if it was done at the last meeting, the process for bringing it back is not all that different.   The motion to "Lay on the table" is designed to be used when something needs to be set aside temporarily, usually during just part of a meeting, so that the assembly can take up something else first.  The motion to "Postpone to a definite time" should be used when the intent is really to postpone something to the next meeting.

 

A matter that has been postponed comes back up automatically under "unfinished business".  There is no such thing as "old business", even though many people persist in using that term.

 

A matter that has been laid on the table does not come back up automatically, but someone must move to "take from the table" the motion that had been laid on the table.  It requires a 2nd and a majority vote to take it from the table.  Usually that is done during "unfinished business", but the motion can actually be made at any time while no other business is pending unless you have a rule to the contrary.  RONR starting on page 300.

 

Once taken from the table, the motion comes back in the same form that it was in when laid on the table.   For debate purposes, it is treated just as if it was being proposed for the first time.  Members may debate it again regardless of whether they debated it the first time.  The slate is wiped clean.  It may also be amended just like any other new motion. 

 

As to whether it is open to "public comment", that is something we cannot answer.  It sounds like maybe this is some kind of public or quasi-public body if the public is allowed to attend and speak.  That is beyond the scope of RONR.  However, RONR does provide that non members may not speak in debate unless granted permission to do so by the assembly. (Footnote on page 263).

[Dan Honemann]

I'm  assuming that the motion was "laid on the table" at the last meeting, because something laid on the table dies if not brought back before the end of the next meeting.  The  proper motion probably would have been to postpone to a definite time (the next meeting) or to refer it to a committee, but for your purposes, if it was done at the last meeting, the process for bringing it back is not all that different.   The motion to "Lay on the table" is designed to be used when something needs to be set aside temporarily, usually during just part of a meeting, so that the assembly can take up something else first.  The motion to "Postpone to a definite time" should be used when the intent is really to postpone something to the next meeting.

 

A matter that has been postponed comes back up automatically under "unfinished business". 

 

This ain't gonna fly on the registration exam.

 

A matter that has been laid on the table does not come back up automatically, but someone must move to "take from the table" the motion that had been laid on the table.  It requires a 2nd and a majority vote to take it from the table.  Usually that is done during "unfinished business", but the motion can actually be made at any time while no other business is pending unless you have a rule to the contrary. 

 

And this ain't either. 

[Richard Brown]

 

This ain't gonna fly on the registration exam.

 

 

 

 

I wondered how long it would be before I would incur "the wrath of Dan".        And I appreciate the gentle (or not so gentle) nudge to dig a little deeper.   I do want to get it right.

 

Would it be better if I said that,  "When Unfinished Business is reached on the agenda or order of business, the Chair should bring it up on his own as an item of unfinished business to be dealt with next"? 

 

I do know that to be the case, as is explained on page 359 of RONR, but I got careless when I told the original poster that "matters that have been postponed come back up automatically under unfinished business".    It is actually incumbent upon the chair to be aware of the fact that there is an item of unfinished business and to bring it up at the appropriate time.     I imagine that if the chair fails to do so, any member can raise a point of order that there is an item of unfinished business that has been overlooked.

 

Did that fix it, or do I need to try again?

 

As to the second comment you made that "and this ain't either" re taking from the table:  You got me on that one.  I knew that a motion to take from the table should normally be made during unfinished business, but I had overlooked or forgotten some of the language starting at line 16 on page 300 and going through line 2 on page301 that says "Unless it is moved under a suspension of the rules it must be moved at a time when no program or rule interferes, and while business of the class to which the subject question belongs. . . is in order."  (emphasis mine).   It clearly belongs in unfinished business.  It is my understanding, though, that a motion to take from the table can still be made at any time when no other business is pending, but that it would require a suspension of the rules to do it at any point other than in unfinished business.

 

Now, did that fix it, or am I still missing something?

 

btw, I could not figure out how to use the "quote" or "multi-quote" feature to properly quote both of your admonitions.  I'll work on that, too. 

[Dan Honemann]

As to my first comment, the nit that I was picking is that a motion postponed from one session to the next without being made a special order will be a general order (not unfinished business) for the session to which it was postponed, and cannot be taken up at that session until all matters of unfinished business (if any) set to come up at that meeting have been disposed of. (In this connection, see pp. 358-59 and 367-68.)

 

As to the second, your reference to the language starting at line 16 on page 300 identifies the nit that I was picking very nicely. If the motion was laid on the table instead of being postponed, then at the next session it may be taken from the table (by majority vote) at a time prior to the time when unfinished business has been reached only if it belongs to a class of business which comes ahead of unfinished business, in which event it may be taken from the table during the time when the class of business to which it belongs is in order. (In this connection, see also p. 356, ll. 16-21 and 28-30; p. 357, ll. 31-33; p. 359, ll. 31-33; and p. 360, ll. 15-19.)

 

By the way, many thanks for returning to this Forum. We need all the help we can get from knowledgeable guys such as yourself!

[Richard Brown]

 

By the way, many thanks for returning to this Forum. We need all the help we can get from knowledgeable guys such as yourself!

 

Thanks, Dan.  I'll do my best.  It does feel good to be back.  Answering (and asking) questions in the forum is helping me to hone my own skills as well.  I don't mind being corrected.  I still have a lot to learn.

 

And thank you for picking the two "nits" that you picked.  I understand both points you were trying to help me to understand now.  And I appreciate you making me dig first.   I knew that the general areas of special orders, general orders and unfinished business were weak areas, but I didn't realize how much so until I dove back into them.  As the footnote on page 53 of RONR In Brief, 1st edition says:  "The topic of general orders is somewhat complicated. . . ."  That's quite an understatement!   (And, yes, I noticed that that same footnote makes clear the point you were making about items being postponed to the next meeting becoming general orders).

 

I have my homework for the next few days cut out for me.  I just did a word search on my downloaded version of the 1200 study questions for the RP exam.  I found that one of the terms: "unfinished business", "general order(s)", "special order(s)", "lay on the table", "laid on the table" or "take from the table"  appear in either the question of one of the answers in approximately 124 of the 1200 questions, after eliminating duplicates.   It appears as part of the question in only some of them, but I made a list of all 124 question numbers.  I won't move on until I'm sure I'm answering all 124 correctly.

 

Thanks again for picking the nits.

[Gary c Tesser]

Yes.  What a joy to see you back!

 

(Don't burn yourself out, dammit!)