Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Ruling motion out of order? Timeing


Guest John
 Share

Recommended Posts

No, after debate gets under way, it is too late.  See RONR, p. 250.

Exceptions:  motions that can lead to, or are continuing breaches of particular rules  --  examples listed on p. 251  --  can be ruled out of order any time later, even years.  Or after debate gets under way.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Challenge of the election against the new President, who also is the Chairperson of the board.  The motion is for EB to grant the challenge and send to membership.  

If you have a link for me to best reference Robert's Rules it would be appreciated.  Worried I'm not looking at most current info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caution:  If the rules in RONR apply, the board would have no authority to receive, grant, deny, or implement "challenges" to elections conducted by the general membership.

This suggests that you may have customized rules in your bylaws that supersede those in RONR, and will need to carefully read all relevant rules in your own documents before applying the general rules in RONR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what we have in regards to challenges.

Challenges. Any member who is entitled to vote may challenge the conduct or results of an election by filing, within ten (10) days of the counting of the ballots, a challenge to the incumbent ST of his or her LU to such effect. The ST shall submit the challenge for decision to the executive board, subject to final ruling by the  membership. 

The chair is ruling motion and challenge out of order but I am contesting the challenge must go to membership.  Since a motion was made to eb seconded and discussed then ruled out of order the chair was wrong.  A special meeting of eboard is being called so am I right the motion is still on the floor and should be voted on.  No matter what eboard votes challenge should be brought to membership. 

Thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The language there is fairly ambiguous, and I would be loath to interpret it.  

The chair may have been wrong to rule a motion out of order after discussion had begun, but if no Appeal (§24) was raised at the time, the decision stands. A point of order would probably not be timely any more.

Whether it is even in order to renew it is in question, because rulings of the chair that have not been overturned by appeal serve as precedent.

I have no idea what to make of the concept that the ruling of the board is always subject to ruling by the memberhship.  What then are we to make of the language "for decision" if a decision either way results in the same outcome?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...