when is a motion ruled dead?

[ctaylor1079]

If a motion was tabled until the next meeting, isnt it required to be voted on at that next meeting? I was under the assumption that if a motion was tabled until a certain time that at that time it was to be voted on or the motion just died.. Is this correct?

[Richard Brown]

It depends on exactly what happened.  A motion cannot be "tabled until  the next meeting".  It can be "postponed to the next meeting" and it can be "laid on the table", but it cannot be "tabled until the next meeting".

 

If a motion is laid on the table and not removed from the table and acted on by the end of the next meeting, assuming it was within a quarterly time interval, it dies.

 

If a motion is  postponed to the next meeting, but is not taken up at that meeting, it comes up again at the next meeting under "unfinished business and general orders".  And again at the meeting after that.  It does not die automatically.

 

Edited to add:  See Frequently Asked Question 12 for more information:  http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#12

[Rev Ed]

If a motion is  postponed to the next meeting, but is not taken up at that meeting, it comes up again at the next meeting under "unfinished business and general orders".  And again at the meeting after that.  It does not die automatically.

 

And if the Chairman stays on top of his/her job, then all the "Unfinished Business and General Orders" would be dealt with in some manner before any "New Business" can occur.  As such, it seems unlikely that something - anything - would not happen at the next meeting.

[Richard Brown]

If a motion was tabled until the next meeting, isnt it required to be voted on at that next meeting? I was under the assumption that if a motion was tabled until a certain time that at that time it was to be voted on or the motion just died.. Is this correct?

You might find this thread from a couple of months ago illustrative.  http://robertsrules.forumflash.com/index.php?/topic/23009-when-does-unfinished-business-die/

 

Keep in mind, though, that that thread discusses a matter that was postponed, not something laid on the table.

[Richard Brown]

For more information on the misuse of the motion to lay on the table, particularly when it is being used to postpone to a definite time, see RONR.  On page 210, it states as follows:

"This motion is commonly misused in ordinary assemblies—in place of the motion to Postpone Indefinitely (11), to Postpone to a Certain Time (14), or other motions. Particularly in such misuses, it also is known as a motion "to table."
By adopting the motion to Lay on the Table, a majority has the power to halt consideration of a question immediately without debate. Such action violates the rights of the minority and individual members if it is for any other purpose than the one stated in the first sentence of this section. In ordinary assemblies, the motion to Lay on the Table is out of order if the evident intent is to kill or avoid dealing with a measure. If a time for resuming consideration is specified in making the motion, it can be admitted only as a motion to Postpone (14), in which case it is debatable (see also pp. 215–17)."

 

Because of that text in RONR, I am treating the motion to "table until the next meeting" as a motion to postpone to a certain time".

[ctaylor1079]

Can you describe what the Quarterly interval would be referring to? In this case we meet every two weeks...

[jstackpo]

"Quarterly" is defined on p. 89-90.

 

If your biweekly meetings are separate sessions (see p. 81ff) then you are well within the "quarterly" limitations.

 

There may be some questions (not researched yet) if the meetings are all part of one session.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Can you describe what the Quarterly interval would be referring to? In this case we meet every two weeks...

"Quarterly" means "every quarter",

i.e., 4 times per year,

i.e., every 3 months.

 

You meet every two weeks.

So your meetings are more often than quarterly.

[Gary Novosielski]

"Quarterly" means "every quarter",

i.e., 4 times per year,

i.e., every 3 months.

If only it were that simple.

[Richard Brown]

If only it were that simple.

Sometimes we gotta use the "KISS" principle. 

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Important rules relating to the continuance of a question from one session to the next depend on whether no more than a quarterly time interval intervenes between the two sessions.

In this book, it is understood that no more than a quarterly time interval intervenes between two sessions if the second session begins at any time during or before the third calendar month after the calendar month in which the first session ends.

For example, with reference to a session held in January, no more than a quarterly time interval has elapsed since the last previous session if that session ended on or after October 1st  of the preceding calendar year; and no more than a quarterly time interval will elapse before the next session if that session will begin  on or before April 30th of the current year.

 

 

[RONR page 89-90]

 

Good luck with trying to explain THAT in the heat of an ongoing meeting.

... January ... October ... April ...

[jstackpo]

Like this...  Three months from today, extended to the end of that month, is the end of the current quarter.

[Edgar Guest]

Like this...  Three months from today, extended to the end of that month, is the end of the current quarter.

 

Well, there is no "current quarter". There's only a "quarterly time interval".

[jstackpo]

Well, yeah, but the "end of the current quarter' is the critical date, beyond which it is improper to postpone motions. 

 

And probably other stuff.