"Sweeping Motions"

[Guest Guest - Brent]

My organization had made motions to multiple items that resolved the issues (for example approving annual reports). However, there was no formal motion to state the item was resolved or to remove from future agendas.

Do these items stay on the agenda for next month's meeting?

If so, can the organization make one sweeping motion to remove all resolved items from the agenda, or do they have to do it one at a time?

[Chris Harrison]

When I was in school and they published the menu of what was going to be for lunch each day for that week it didn't also include what we had already ate the past week.  Is there a reason your organization isn't doing the (parliamentary) same thing?

[Greg Goodwiller, PRP]

If I am reading your post correctly, there were items on the agenda that needed approval or other action (such as minutes), but at the meeting no action was taken on them. If that is true, and they still need to be acted on, then they should be placed on the agenda for the next meeting.

To use Mr. Harrison’s analogy, if peas were on the menu, and nobody ate them, then they go back on the menu again tomorrow (at least, that’s what we always accused them of doing at our cafeteria!).

[Greg Goodwiller, PRP]

Regarding your “sweeping motion,” while it is possible to move the adoption of more than one recommendation or proposal at a time, it makes the amendment more complex, and is really not necessary or advisable, unless the actions can all be taken by unanimous consent (don’t need discussion or amendment, and no one objects to their adoption).

it sounds as if your presiding officer needs some assistance with meeting process. I would try to focus there.

[Josh Martin]

1 hour ago, Guest Guest - Brent said:

My organization had made motions to multiple items that resolved the issues (for example approving annual reports). However, there was no formal motion to state the item was resolved or to remove from future agendas.

Could you provide some specific examples of what you mean by this?

[J. J.]

It sounds a bit like a consent calendar. 

[Guest Zev]

8 hours ago, Guest Guest - Brent said:

My organization had made motions to multiple items that resolved the issues...

I don't understand why you call them "resolved" issues. If the various motions were voted on then there is nothing to re-visit. Please shed some light on how these motions got on the agenda and what happened during the meeting that made you think that they were not finally dealt with and needed something else done to them. Did the presiding officer state the motions and they were voted on? Where they postponed? Referred to a committee? What happened?

[Guest Guest - Brent]

15 hours ago, Josh Martin said:

Could you provide some specific examples of what you mean by this?

8 hours ago, Guest Zev said:

I don't understand why you call them "resolved" issues. If the various motions were voted on then there is nothing to re-visit. Please shed some light on how these motions got on the agenda and what happened during the meeting that made you think that they were not finally dealt with and needed something else done to them. Did the presiding officer state the motions and they were voted on? Where they postponed? Referred to a committee? What happened?

 

Thank you everyone for your insight. The question arose because there was tracking concerns among staff for long term projects. For example there was consideration of terminating a contract with a vendor for a different one which led to months of searching  for alternative vendors, and then other alternative vendors, as well as monthly due diligence reports on these vendors. This kept the item on the agenda. However, the committee finally agreed on a selected vendor through a motion and effectively resolving the item.

However, because there wasn't a subsequent motion to remove this item from future agendas or a motion to consider the item resolved, this staff person believes the item should stay on the agenda. Their concern is for tracking and historical purposes i.e. if their is no motion to removing an item from future agendas, and we have to do some research on the matter 1, 2, 5, or 10 years down the road, how will we know that the matter was resolved?

I personally thought this is not an issue for minutes or parliamentary procedures, rather an internal process of the organization, but the question keeps coming up which has led me down this rabbit hole.

[Atul Kapur]

1 hour ago, Guest Guest - Brent said:

how will we know that the matter was resolved?

Well, the minutes should have a record of the adoption of the motion selecting the vendor. That resolved the matter so there is no need to keep it on the agenda.

(some on this forum would jump in here to say that committees don't keep minutes, usually, according to RONR. While that is true, it is clear that this committee is using formal agendas so I'm assuming it also has minutes of its meetings).

Your committee could also create and keep an Action List, which could, for your purposes, keep track of issues, motions, and how and when they are resolved.

But it is ridiculous and a waste of time to have to move a motion resolving a matter and then move a second motion to remove the matter from the agenda. And think of the absurd result if you adopt a motion that resolves the matter but then defeat the motion removing it from the agenda.

Edited September 11, 2018 at 03:36 PM by Atul Kapur

[Josh Martin]

3 hours ago, Guest Guest - Brent said:

Thank you everyone for your insight. The question arose because there was tracking concerns among staff for long term projects. For example there was consideration of terminating a contract with a vendor for a different one which led to months of searching  for alternative vendors, and then other alternative vendors, as well as monthly due diligence reports on these vendors. This kept the item on the agenda. However, the committee finally agreed on a selected vendor through a motion and effectively resolving the item.

However, because there wasn't a subsequent motion to remove this item from future agendas or a motion to consider the item resolved, this staff person believes the item should stay on the agenda. Their concern is for tracking and historical purposes i.e. if their is no motion to removing an item from future agendas, and we have to do some research on the matter 1, 2, 5, or 10 years down the road, how will we know that the matter was resolved?

I personally thought this is not an issue for minutes or parliamentary procedures, rather an internal process of the organization, but the question keeps coming up which has led me down this rabbit hole.

Thank you. Based on these additional facts, I do not think a motion to remove these items from future agendas is necessary.

[Gary Novosielski]

23 hours ago, Guest Guest - Brent said:

 

Thank you everyone for your insight. The question arose because there was tracking concerns among staff for long term projects. For example there was consideration of terminating a contract with a vendor for a different one which led to months of searching  for alternative vendors, and then other alternative vendors, as well as monthly due diligence reports on these vendors. This kept the item on the agenda. However, the committee finally agreed on a selected vendor through a motion and effectively resolving the item.

However, because there wasn't a subsequent motion to remove this item from future agendas or a motion to consider the item resolved, this staff person believes the item should stay on the agenda. Their concern is for tracking and historical purposes i.e. if their is no motion to removing an item from future agendas, and we have to do some research on the matter 1, 2, 5, or 10 years down the road, how will we know that the matter was resolved?

I personally thought this is not an issue for minutes or parliamentary procedures, rather an internal process of the organization, but the question keeps coming up which has led me down this rabbit hole.

I'm not sure I fully understand, but let me describe how this matter would ordinarily be resolved under the rules in RONR, and you can see how closely it matches what your organization does.

• The general assembly determines that that it would be beneficial to terminate the contract with the current vendor and assigns the task of finding a new vendor to a committee. 
• The committee undertakes a search and reports its progress back to the assembly on a regular basis, saying that it has not yet arrived at a final recommendation.  This is not quite the same as "remaining on the agenda" but it does mean that the matter comes up each meeting as an unresolved item.
• The committee arrives at a decision.  It votes to rise and report its recommendation to the assembly.
• At the next assembly meeting, the reporting member of the committee moves to enter into a contract with the new vendor.
• The assembly adopts, amends, or rejects the motion, which is then entered in the minutes, and if approved a new contract is executed.  The matter is resolved and would not appear on a future agenda.

What seems to be missing from your description is the last step, where the assembly takes action.  From reading your description it sounds  like the committee makes the final decision and the assembly hears about it informally, and doesn't vote to approve, amend, or reject the recommendation.  That would indeed leave the matter hanging.

Edited September 12, 2018 at 01:44 PM by Gary Novosielski

[Guest Who's Coming to Dinner]

23 hours ago, Guest Guest - Brent said:

f their is no motion to removing an item from future agendas, and we have to do some research on the matter 1, 2, 5, or 10 years down the road, how will we know that the matter was resolved?

Because your minutes will show that "the committee finally agreed on a selected vendor through a motion ." It seems as though this staff person is trying to impose unnecessary bureaucratic complications on a straightforward parliamentary situation.

[Joshua Katz]

23 hours ago, Guest Guest - Brent said:

However, because there wasn't a subsequent motion to remove this item from future agendas or a motion to consider the item resolved, this staff person believes the item should stay on the agenda. Their concern is for tracking and historical purposes i.e. if their is no motion to removing an item from future agendas, and we have to do some research on the matter 1, 2, 5, or 10 years down the road, how will we know that the matter was resolved?

 

This staff person doesn't know what he's talking about. Meanwhile, your organization would do well to remember who reports to whom - i.e. staff reports to you.

[Guest Guest - Brent]

Thanks everyone for your insight. This has been a huge help.