Motion to take from the Table

[JaniceH]

I have a question regarding taking an item of business that was put on the table. 

 

At a meeting several years ago, a motion giving staff direction was placed on the table.  The directors have not formally met since and unfortunately the direction was never addressed. 

We have a formal meeting tomorrow and the item was brought back as “Business Arising from the Minutes”. 

 

Do we need a motion to take the item back from the table before discussion?  Is there a time period whereby the previous motion expires? If a motion is required what might the wording be?

Edited September 22, 2020 at 03:19 PM by JaniceH

[Josh Martin]

7 minutes ago, JaniceH said:

We have a formal meeting tomorrow and the item was brought back as “Business Arising from the Minutes”. 

 

"Business Arising from the Minutes" is not a heading under the standard order of business.

8 minutes ago, JaniceH said:

Do we need a motion to take the item back from the table before discussion?

No. The motion which was laid on the table has long since expired.

8 minutes ago, JaniceH said:

Is there a time period whereby the previous motion expires?

Yes. A motion which is laid on the table "dies" if it is not taken from the table by the end of the next regular meeting if that meeting is within a quarterly interval (about three months) or by the end of the same meeting if the next meeting is not within a quarterly interval. Since you say this was laid on the table at a meeting several years ago, it certainly expired.

10 minutes ago, JaniceH said:

If a motion is required what might the wording be?

The motion may simply be made anew as a main motion under New Business.

[JaniceH]

20 minutes ago, Josh Martin said:

"Business Arising from the Minutes" is not a heading under the standard order of business.

No. The motion which was laid on the table has long since expired.

Sorry...the heading was actually "Matters Arising from the Minutes"

 

I rechecked the motion and it had a date attached to it which was a year later.  Was this not a proper motion to start with then? 

 

 

[Weldon Merritt]

9 minutes ago, JaniceH said:

Sorry...the heading was actually "Matters Arising from the Minutes"

That's still not a heading in the standard order of business.

12 minutes ago, JaniceH said:

I rechecked the motion and it had a date attached to it which was a year later.  Was this not a proper motion to start with then? 

What do you mean? Did the original motion have an effective date of a year later? That would be unusual, but not (IMO) out of order. But it's also irrelevant. Since it was laid on the table and not taken from the table within the required time, it is now dead.

If you mean that the motion to Lay on the Table had a date attached to it, it indeed was improper. First, a motion cannot be laid on the table with a specific time for taking it from the table. The proper motion for doing that would be to Postpone to a Certain Time.  But even if the motion were interpreted as a motion to Postpone, it would not have been in order because a motion cannot be postponed past the next regular session within a quarterly time interval.

[Rob Elsman]

A meeting held "several years" (!) after the last meeting of the directors should be treated much the same as a new assembly.  There will be no general orders, special orders, items  on the table, or motions to reconsider made but not taken up.  Hopefully, some provision for approving the minutes was made, in which case there will not be any minutes to read and approve, either.