Object to Consideration of an item of Unfinished Business

[laser158689]

Spitballing about how to avoid an annoying item which is unfinished business from a previous session, our Moderator said that we could not use Object to Consideration as the item was already under consideration at the previous session.

Is that a common interpretation/understanding?

 

[Rob Elsman]

Your Moderator is absolutely correct— bless his heart. Once the debate has begun, the objection is not in order.

You might be able to shorten the annoyance by moving the Previous Question when the main motion is pending, but this motion requires a two-thirds vote for adoption.

Other than that, try to maintain an attentiveness to the debate and work to find a compromise that is not so annoying.

[Gary Novosielski]

52 minutes ago, laser158689 said:

Spitballing about how to avoid an annoying item which is unfinished business from a previous session, our Moderator said that we could not use Object to Consideration as the item was already under consideration at the previous session.

Is that a common interpretation/understanding?

 

Yes it is the correct understanding.

You might find that the motion to Postpone Indefinitely would be a way of disposing of the annoying motion without actually deciding on its merit.

[Rob Elsman]

The downside of Postpone Indefinitely is that it opens the main motion fully to debate, potentially lengthening the suffering considerably.

[Greg Goodwiller, PRP]

I would note that "unfinished business" does not necessarily indicate the "debate has begun,"  as member Elsman has stated. It may mean that the item was simply not reached at the previously meeting. In that case, I do not think that a a motion objecting to consideration would be out of order.

 

[Gary Novosielski]

48 minutes ago, Rob Elsman said:

The downside of Postpone Indefinitely is that it opens the main motion fully to debate, potentially lengthening the suffering considerably.

True enough, but sometimes the pain is more in the voting on the motion than in the discussion of it.  And the motion for the Previous Question would still be available. 

31 minutes ago, Greg Goodwiller said:

I would note that "unfinished business" does not necessarily indicate the "debate has begun,"  as member Elsman has stated. It may mean that the item was simply not reached at the previously meeting. In that case, I do not think that a a motion objecting to consideration would be out of order.

That's a possibility, but the OP did state that according to the General Manager, the motion had been "under consideration" at the previous meeting.  Exactly what that means I can only guess.

[Rob Elsman]

I stand by my previous response, which was, indeed, made in the light of the poster's statement that the motion had been "under consideration" at the previous session. From the nature of the question and poster's apparent knowledge of motions, it seems safe to me to interpret "under consideration" as meaning exactly what is correctly meant by the term.

[laser158689]

Our Rules (municipal town meeting) have an interesting provision for a "second reading" on certain types of items (ordinances, rules changes).  This Rule says...

0. b. The Proposed Resolution shall then be presented at that initial Town Meeting, and committee reports shall be given. Discussion on the item will be appropriate. Motions to amend The Proposed Resolution may be voted upon at that meeting.
   c. The Moderator will then place the item on the Call of the next regularly scheduled Town Meeting.

So, we considered it in January.  Now it's back for the next regularly scheduled meeting.  The meeting has not happened, so we have not taken it up at the second meeting.

Essentially, the question can be restated this way...  Does the motion to Object to Consideration apply at any session where it might be taken up, or is it only applicable at the very first session where it might be taken up?

[Atul Kapur]

I would say that Object to Consideration can only be raised at the first time it is being considered, in this case, January. As it is, your rules apparently allow debate and amendment at the first meeting then automatically Postpone the matter to the next meeting.

[Theoretical note just for completeness: If your rules did not allow for discussion and amendment at the first meeting, then my answer would be different, because that would just be analogous to giving notice of motion.]

[Josh Martin]

16 hours ago, laser158689 said:

Our Rules (municipal town meeting) have an interesting provision for a "second reading" on certain types of items (ordinances, rules changes).  This Rule says...

0. b. The Proposed Resolution shall then be presented at that initial Town Meeting, and committee reports shall be given. Discussion on the item will be appropriate. Motions to amend The Proposed Resolution may be voted upon at that meeting.
   c. The Moderator will then place the item on the Call of the next regularly scheduled Town Meeting.

So, we considered it in January.  Now it's back for the next regularly scheduled meeting.  The meeting has not happened, so we have not taken it up at the second meeting.

Essentially, the question can be restated this way...  Does the motion to Object to Consideration apply at any session where it might be taken up, or is it only applicable at the very first session where it might be taken up?

An Objection to the Consideration of a Question may only be raised when an item is first introduced for consideration (and even then, the time limits for raising it are very strict). This is because the purpose of this motion is to prevent any consideration of the question. After consideration of the question has already begun, this is simply no longer possible.

At this juncture, my recommendation would be for a member to move to postpone the motion indefinitely, and then follow up with a motion for the Previous Question. These could even be combined into a single motion by means of a motion to Suspend the Rules. This will still accomplish the objective of swiftly disposing of the motion and will still avoid a direct vote on the main question.

Edited March 10, 2020 at 04:48 PM by Josh Martin

[Guest laser158689]

Atul, can you provide some analysis or citation as to why/how that would be?

[J. J.]

12 hours ago, Atul Kapur said:

I would say that Object to Consideration can only be raised at the first time it is being considered, in this case, January. As it is, your rules apparently allow debate and amendment at the first meeting then automatically Postpone the matter to the next meeting.

[Theoretical note just for completeness: If your rules did not allow for discussion and amendment at the first meeting, then my answer would be different, because that would just be analogous to giving notice of motion.]

I will,  p. 268, 2.

Notion of a motion does not bring that motion before the assembly.

[Atul Kapur]

11 hours ago, Guest laser158689 said:

Atul, can you provide some analysis or citation as to why/how that would be?

I believe Mr. Martin has more completely explained my statement and that J.J. has explained my theoretical aside, which does not apply to your situation. I only added it because, where organizations use "readings," they more commonly use them just for the purpose of giving notice, not to discuss a matter at two separate meetings, as yours does.