Rescinding motion previously adopted

[Guest Sara]

In a Special Meeting (duly called) a motion was adopted.  Subsequently, the Prexy declared the Sp. Mtg null and void (which you have already advised she can't do). Am not sure WHY.  So....in the General Meeting coming up, may a member of the group that adopted the motion, move to rescind the motion adopted in the SPECIAL meeting.

I guess what I am asking is may a motion adopted in a Special Meeting be rescinded in a subsequent General Meeting?

 

Thanks,

Sara

[Dan Honemann]

22 minutes ago, Guest Sara said:

In a Special Meeting (duly called) a motion was adopted.  Subsequently, the Prexy declared the Sp. Mtg null and void (which you have already advised she can't do). Am not sure WHY.  So....in the General Meeting coming up, may a member of the group that adopted the motion, move to rescind the motion adopted in the SPECIAL meeting.

I guess what I am asking is may a motion adopted in a Special Meeting be rescinded in a subsequent General Meeting?

 

Thanks,

Sara

The fact that a motion is adopted during a special meeting has no effect at all on the question as to whether or not it can subsequently be rescinded.

[Josh Martin]

30 minutes ago, Guest Sara said:

In a Special Meeting (duly called) a motion was adopted.  Subsequently, the Prexy declared the Sp. Mtg null and void (which you have already advised she can't do). Am not sure WHY.  So....in the General Meeting coming up, may a member of the group that adopted the motion, move to rescind the motion adopted in the SPECIAL meeting.

I guess what I am asking is may a motion adopted in a Special Meeting be rescinded in a subsequent General Meeting?

If I understand the facts from your previous thread correctly, a special meeting was properly called, however, a main motion which was not included in the call of the meeting was made and adopted. The President later declared the entire special meeting to be null and void. Not only is this ruling incorrect (as only the motion which was not included in the call is null and void), but it is improper because the President cannot make rulings outside of a meeting. As a result, the situation as it stands now is that the special meeting and all business conducted at the meeting is presumed to be valid until determined otherwise. Based on this, a member could move to Rescind the motion improperly adopted in the special meeting.

It would be preferable, however, for a member to raise a Point of Order that the motion is null and void, and for the President to rule on that point.

It's also possible you are asking about one of the motions which was included in the call of the meeting, in which event, Rescind is certainly the appropriate tool.

 

[Dan Honemann]

18 hours ago, Josh Martin said:

If I understand the facts from your previous thread correctly, a special meeting was properly called, however, a main motion which was not included in the call of the meeting was made and adopted. The President later declared the entire special meeting to be null and void. Not only is this ruling incorrect (as only the motion which was not included in the call is null and void), but it is improper because the President cannot make rulings outside of a meeting. As a result, the situation as it stands now is that the special meeting and all business conducted at the meeting is presumed to be valid until determined otherwise. Based on this, a member could move to Rescind the motion improperly adopted in the special meeting.

It would be preferable, however, for a member to raise a Point of Order that the motion is null and void, and for the President to rule on that point.

It's also possible you are asking about one of the motions which was included in the call of the meeting, in which event, Rescind is certainly the appropriate tool.

 

Josh, suppose that the motion to rescind whatever it was that was improperly adopted at the special meeting is defeated. Will it still be in order, at some later time, to raise a point of order regarding the validity of the action improperly taken at the special meeting? I would think so.

Suppose that, instead of moving to rescind whatever it was that was improperly adopted at the special meeting, a motion is made to amend it, and this motion is declared to have been adopted. No points of order of any kind are raised at the time. Will it still be in order, at some later time, to raise a point of order regarding the validity of the action improperly taken at the special meeting? Has adoption of the motion to amend whatever it was that was improperly adopted at the special meeting effectively ratified that action? I don't think I would want to answer these questions without having a full, detailed set of facts. 

[Josh Martin]

On August 7, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Daniel H. Honemann said:

Josh, suppose that the motion to rescind whatever it was that was improperly adopted at the special meeting is defeated. Will it still be in order, at some later time, to raise a point of order regarding the validity of the action improperly taken at the special meeting? I would think so.

Suppose that, instead of moving to rescind whatever it was that was improperly adopted at the special meeting, a motion is made to amend it, and this motion is declared to have been adopted. No points of order of any kind are raised at the time. Will it still be in order, at some later time, to raise a point of order regarding the validity of the action improperly taken at the special meeting? Has adoption of the motion to amend whatever it was that was improperly adopted at the special meeting effectively ratified that action? I don't think I would want to answer these questions without having a full, detailed set of facts. 

Yes, I would agree that a Point of Order could still be raised regarding the motion if it was rescinded, but if the motion was amended instead, there may be a question as to whether this effectively ratified the action, depending on the facts of the specific case.

 

[Shmuel Gerber]

On 8/7/2016 at 8:03 AM, Daniel H. Honemann said:

Josh, suppose that the motion to rescind whatever it was that was improperly adopted at the special meeting is defeated. Will it still be in order, at some later time, to raise a point of order regarding the validity of the action improperly taken at the special meeting? I would think so.

 

7 hours ago, Josh Martin said:

Yes, I would agree that a Point of Order could still be raised regarding the motion if it was rescinded,

But Dan didn't say he thought a point of order would be in order regarding the validity of a motion that has actually been rescinded. I suppose it should be, since there might be some ramifications as to whether  the motion was properly in effect between the time it was declared adopted and the time it was rescinded.

[Dan Honemann]

9 hours ago, Shmuel Gerber said:

But Dan didn't say he thought a point of order would be in order regarding the validity of a motion that has actually been rescinded. I suppose it should be, since there might be some ramifications as to whether  the motion was properly in effect between the time it was declared adopted and the time it was rescinded.

The motion to Rescind can only be applied to something which has continuing force and effect.

If a member is of the opinion that what a particular motion proposes to rescind is a nullity, I think he will need to raise a point of order concerning this supposed violation of the rules promptly at the time the breach occurs. I gather, however, that you would not be willing to go so far as to say that when an assembly adopts a motion to rescind something, it has decided that what it rescinded had continuing force and effect at the time of its rescission. Neither would I.

[Shmuel Gerber]

4 hours ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

I gather, however, that you would not be willing to go so far as to say that when an assembly adopts a motion to rescind something, it has decided that what it rescinded had continuing force and effect at the time of its rescission. Neither would I.

Well, I think that people generally don't go around rescinding motions that they don't believe exist. :-)

But I agree that adoption of a motion to Rescind is not a formal declaration that adoption of the motion being rescinded didn't violate the rules (i.e., the rules that are later alleged to have been violated in such a way as to represent a continuing breach), any more than the original declaration of the motion's adoption would represent the assembly's judgment on the same point of order.

Until a point of order is raised against the adoption of the original motion, that issue is simply not a question before the assembly. In adopting the motion to Rescind, the assembly is acting on the assumption that whatever has previously been declared adopted is what is in effect -- which is the only reasonable way for the assembly to behave until someone realizes that there has been a continuing breach of the rules and raises a point of order to that effect.