Voting on amendments

[kimd55]

We are voting on our local policies and Procedures. Can we take amendments we are voting on and put them in blocks without allowing discussion at the time of voting on the amendments?

Edited June 11, 2018 at 09:00 AM by kimd55

[jstackpo]

In the order you asked:

1)  Yes, you can make amendments as you consider the adoption of your local P&Ps.

2)  Don't know what you mean by "putting in blocks".

3)  No discussion?  Only if you adopt the motion for the Previous Question  --  the motion to stop debate and vote immediately.  Requires 2/3 to be adopted.   It is probably not a good idea to do so as others eyes may see (fixable) problems in the proposals that you overlooked.

[kimd55]

Let me explain this a little better. We have a committee that goes in and makes recommendations to our local Policies and Procedures. They sent out communications several times for members to come and discuss and give input on the amendments. Last Thursday the committee sent the proposed amendments with their formal recommendations. Instead of listing the amendments individually as they were sent to us, they lumped some of the amendments in blocks to vote on indicating they formal recommendations from the committee not allowing a second for each amendment. They read the amendments in the blocks that were grouped together very fast not allowing the members to have discussion, just vote. I have never seen anything like this and tried to find it Roberts Rules. My question is can amendments that govern how your local organization is run, be grouped in blocks rather than individual amendments that were originally presented? Also, can they say there can be no discussion?

[Richard Brown]

Kimd55, I still don't understand exactly what happened, but I think I get the general idea. It sounds like the proponents of the bylaw amendments wanted some to be adopted without discussion or debate. There is a way to do that, but from your description of what happened it does not appear that the proper process was followed.

The proper way to do something like that is for the assembly to adopt a motion suspending the rules and providing that certain proposed amendments must be voted up or down as is without debate and/or further amendments. It would require a two-thirds vote of the assembly to suspend the rules to do something like that. It cannot be imposed upon the assembly by the proponents, the officers, the board, or anyone else unless the bylaws specifically give them that right. It would be most unusual if your bylaws do that.

 Edited to add;  like Dr. Stackpole, I don't understand exactly what you mean by putting something "in blocks".

 

Edited June 11, 2018 at 03:11 PM by Richard Brown
Added last paragraph

[Josh Martin]

1 hour ago, kimd55 said:

My question is can amendments that govern how your local organization is run, be grouped in blocks rather than individual amendments that were originally presented? Also, can they say there can be no discussion?

A member could make a motion that several proposed amendments be adopted in gross. The assembly may divide the question.to instead consider the amendments separately. If the amendments are on related subjects, dividing them requires a majority vote. If they are not related, a single member may demand division. Cutting off discussion requires a 2/3 vote.

[Guest Who's Coming to Dinner]

2 hours ago, kimd55 said:

They read the amendments in the blocks that were grouped together very fast not allowing the members to have discussion, just vote.

Your biggest problem is letting "them" run your meeting as "they" please. Don't you have a president or chairman? That person should be maintaining order instead of allowing a few committee members to play dictator.

[kimd55]

When the members tried to ask questions or have discussion, the President told the members there would be no discussion and we didn’t like what was being proposed to vote it down. Also can you point me to the area in Roberts Rules in discussion when voting on amendments and grouping several amendments together?

[Richard Brown]

5 minutes ago, kimd55 said:

When the members tried to ask questions or have discussion, the President told the members there would be no discussion and we didn’t like what was being proposed to vote it down

When that happens, it's time to raise a point of order that debate and amendments can be prohibited only by a 2/3 vote of the assembly to suspend the rules.  If the chair rules the point of order not well taken, you appeal from the decision of the chair.  It requires a second and is usually subject to somewhat limited debate... each member can speak only once but the chair can speak  twice, first and last in debate.  It requires a majority vote to overturn the decision of the chair.  The  chair's decision is sustained on a tie vote.

[Richard Brown]

15 minutes ago, kimd55 said:

Also can you point me to the area in Roberts Rules in discussion when voting on amendments and grouping several amendments together?

Section 27 of RONR, "Division of a Question", on pages 270-276

Edited to add:  Several bylaw amendments could be presented as one motion, i.e., a motion to amend sections 1.4, 3.5, 4.2, and 6.3 of the bylaws... all in one motion.  The motion could then be divided as set out in the section on Division of a Question so that each amendment would have to be considered separately.

Edited June 11, 2018 at 05:46 PM by Richard Brown
Added last paragraph

[Joshua Katz]

2 hours ago, Richard Brown said:

 Edited to add;  like Dr. Stackpole, I don't understand exactly what you mean by putting something "in blocks".

 

It sounds like something akin to a consent calendar.

[Gary Novosielski]

When the president declares that the membership has no right to debate a bylaws amendment, it's time to get a new president, or at least censure the old one.

Just sayin'.