re-open adjourned meeting?

[Guest Daniel Martins]

I chaired the recent annual convention of an organization. When we had exhausted the agenda, I declared the meeting adjourned, though there was no motion or vote. I have since been petitioned by several delegates to re-convene the meeting for the purpose a reconsidering a motion that the relevant committee requested the convention ask me to declare out of order because of some technical defects in the proposal, and, upon the vote of the convention, I did so. Now there is evidence that many of the delegates did not clearly understand what they were voting on (which the parliamentarian advised me was *in effect* a motion to table, and therefore not debatable). Moreover, it is now acknowledged that one of the technical defects is the result of negligence on the part of the secretary of the organization, and that the other alleged technical defect (that the proposal conflicts with the organization's constitution) is a matter of interpretation, and not unassailable. I have the authority to call a *special* convention, but the constitution is clear that the matter under consideration must be dealt with only in a *regular* convention. Is there any basis on which I might re-open the adjourned regular convention, so the tabled item of business can be reconsidered?

[Josh Martin]

2 minutes ago, Guest Daniel Martins said:

Is there any basis on which I might re-open the adjourned regular convention, so the tabled item of business can be reconsidered?

No.

[Nathan Zook]

No.

I might add that this is an example of why it is useful to go over the bylaws in detail to surface corner cases and "what can go wrong" situations.  I'm a big fan of having provisions that permit the recalling of a convention, for instance.

[Atul Kapur]

I cannot think of a clearer pathway to never-ending revisiting of the same issue than by allowing recalling of an adjourned convention.

[J. J.]

No.  The members might be able to petition for a special meeting, if the bylaws permit a certain number of members to call special meetings. 

[Nathan Zook]

21 hours ago, Atul Kapur said:

I cannot think of a clearer pathway to never-ending revisiting of the same issue than by allowing recalling of an adjourned convention.

There are multiple checks on such an event.  1) The cost of a (political) convention in even a mid-sized state easily runs into 6 figures.  Never mind the cost to the delegates.  2) The convening authority is (at least eventually) accountable to the convention.

The main cause to recall a convention would be the sudden incapacity of a nominee.  With proper rules, almost anything else can be managed by the executive authority.

But if you're really concerned about never-ending revisiting of the same issue, I would just stay out of politics entirely.   (Seriously, there was a rules abuse by a state chairman one year that resulted in an attempt to add specific language to the rules.  This attempt was made two, four, and ten years after the fact.)