ProlificSwan Posted January 16, 2015 at 07:04 AM Report Share Posted January 16, 2015 at 07:04 AM Can a senate body vote on an item that was referred to a committee if the committee has not been able to meet to discuss it for whatever reason? Does Robert's Rules have any recommendations? I have not found any for my particular case and have the sneaking suspicion that it is only decided based on the bylaws or senate rules. I'll explain the situation which brought this question up. A bill was introduced late for a small expenditure that was time sensitive and needed to take place before the next senate meeting. Senate discussed the bill, then moved to suspend the rules (2/3 vote) and move the item to old business in order to vote on it. When an item moves from new to old business, the committee concerned with the bill is supposed to meet on it, however the committee in this case did not have all their members and could not make quorum, so a proper committee recommendation was not possible to make before the bill would be rendered moot. Since no precedent was evident for this situation, we decided to require a 2/3 vote to pass it, though this may have been a hasty judgement call. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 16, 2015 at 10:58 AM Report Share Posted January 16, 2015 at 10:58 AM Much of this seems to be governed by your own customized rules, but a careful read of what is said in Sec. 36 of RONR may prove to be helpful. Note particularly what is said on page 312, lines 22-27. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted January 16, 2015 at 01:46 PM Report Share Posted January 16, 2015 at 01:46 PM To place the matter back in the hands of the assembly, the committee should be Discharged, at least from that task, if it has more than one. Normally, that takes a 2/3 vote, so your action was essentially in accord with the rules, if somewhat flawed in execution. But a Discharge motion only takes a majority vote if the committee has failed to meet the scheduled time for its report. That may have been the case since the motion was time-sensitive, but you didn't say whether the committee was instructed to report by a certain time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProlificSwan Posted January 20, 2015 at 02:23 AM Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2015 at 02:23 AM Thanks for the insight. I was not aware of the discharge motion. I am looking into clarifying our bylaws because of what happened. It's comforting to know that I effectively did the right thing though. In our particular case the committee did not have the normal amount of time to meet (a week) and the alternative of them taking a short break to allow them to meet on it was not possible because not enough of their members were present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted January 20, 2015 at 02:36 AM Report Share Posted January 20, 2015 at 02:36 AM Um, your bylaws? Great Steaming Cobnuts, whyever why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 20, 2015 at 04:19 AM Report Share Posted January 20, 2015 at 04:19 AM Um, your bylaws? Great Steaming Cobnuts, whyever why? The association's bylaws appear to have customized rules on this subject. Senate discussed the bill, then moved to suspend the rules (2/3 vote) and move the item to old business in order to vote on it. When an item moves from new to old business, the committee concerned with the bill is supposed to meet on it... RONR does not require that an item be moved to Unfinished Business before it is voted on, nor does it provide that an item which is moved to Unfinished Business is automatically referred to the appropriate committee, so both of these things are presumably found in the organization's rules. The organization appears not to have considered the possibility that a committee would be unable to meet on a motion in time for the assembly to act on it, and greater clarity in that regard may be desirable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted January 20, 2015 at 01:44 PM Report Share Posted January 20, 2015 at 01:44 PM The association's bylaws appear to have customized rules on this subject. RONR does not require that an item be moved to Unfinished Business before it is voted on, nor does it provide that an item which is moved to Unfinished Business is automatically referred to the appropriate committee, so both of these things are presumably found in the organization's rules. The organization appears not to have considered the possibility that a committee would be unable to meet on a motion in time for the assembly to act on it, and greater clarity in that regard may be desirable. OK, but you don't think that, rather than "clarifying" their bylaws, their senate might be better served by just dumping all that bilge? (Josh, maybe your "appear" and "presumbaly" -- and Mr Honemann's "seems" in Post 2 -- suggest that maybe, instead, they're making some bilge up, or simply have been misinformed? (C'mon, your post didn't even acknowledge Mr Swan's use of the fictional "old business.") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 20, 2015 at 02:29 PM Report Share Posted January 20, 2015 at 02:29 PM OK, but you don't think that, rather than "clarifying" their bylaws, their senate might be better served by just dumping all that bilge? (Josh, maybe your "appear" and "presumbaly" -- and Mr Honemann's "seems" in Post 2 -- suggest that maybe, instead, they're making some bilge up, or simply have been misinformed? (C'mon, your post didn't even acknowledge Mr Swan's use of the fictional "old business.")It's possible that they may have simply been misinformed. It is also correct that the proper term is Unfinished Business, not Old Business. As for whether the Senate would be better served by "just dumping all that bilge," that will be for the Senate to decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProlificSwan Posted January 22, 2015 at 07:24 PM Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 07:24 PM It is the result of students at a university passing on a tradition which they know little about from year to year. I can't speak to the properness of it, only that it is what we have. A complete overhaul of our bylaws would be difficult, though not impossible. We typically introduce a bill into new business and give a committee a week to meet on it. At that point it is automatically moved to "old business" and the committee gives their recommendation and any changes they think are necessary to the senate. The bill is then voted on. Old business may be better described as unfinished business as you say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 22, 2015 at 07:29 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 07:29 PM It is the result of students at a university passing on a tradition which they know little about from year to year. I can't speak to the properness of it, only that it is what we have. A complete overhaul of our bylaws would be difficult, though not impossible. We typically introduce a bill into new business and give a committee a week to meet on it. At that point it is automatically moved to "old business" and the committee gives their recommendation and any changes they think are necessary to the senate. The bill is then voted on. Old business may be better described as unfinished business as you say.Okay, well, none of this is required by RONR. An assembly may postpone a motion or refer it to a committee if it wishes, but it is also free to act on the motion immediately. So all of this suspending the rules may not be necessary at all, unless this process is required by the organization's rules.Additionally, when a committee reports on a motion, this does not happen during New Business or Unfinished Business, but during Committee Reports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.