Gary Leach Posted November 23, 2020 at 04:14 PM Report Share Posted November 23, 2020 at 04:14 PM Previous notice is given at a monthly meeting of intent to make a motion at the next monthly meeting. At that next meeting, the member who gave the notice is absent. We already know what the motion was going to be because it was stated along with the notice. I assume it is permissible for some other member to make the motion, correct? If so, since notice was given but the motion had not yet been made, I assume it would have to be made under New Business, correct? If no one makes the motion, I assume the notice "falls to the ground" and the process would have to start over; the member would have to provide notice again at a future meeting and then be present at the following meeting to make the motion, correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Katz Posted November 23, 2020 at 04:23 PM Report Share Posted November 23, 2020 at 04:23 PM Yes. Yes. Yes, the process "start[s] over," but, just as before, the member giving notice need not be present to make the motion if someone else makes it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Leach Posted November 24, 2020 at 12:39 AM Author Report Share Posted November 24, 2020 at 12:39 AM Thanks for the confirmation! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Who moved? Posted November 25, 2020 at 04:03 AM Report Share Posted November 25, 2020 at 04:03 AM A related question. Who is recorded in the minutes as having made /moved the motion. is it the member who made the notice or the member who made it at the meeting? I guess it is the member who made it at the meeting but am not completely sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted November 25, 2020 at 04:26 AM Report Share Posted November 25, 2020 at 04:26 AM 22 minutes ago, Guest Who moved? said: A related question. Who is recorded in the minutes as having made /moved the motion. is it the member who made the notice or the member who made it at the meeting? I guess it is the member who made it at the meeting but am not completely sure. The member who made the motion at the meeting is the one who is recorded as having made the motion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted November 25, 2020 at 06:23 PM Report Share Posted November 25, 2020 at 06:23 PM 13 hours ago, Richard Brown said: The member who made the motion at the meeting is the one who is recorded as having made the motion. Note that minutes where notice was given should include the notice. It may not technically be required to list the name of the person making giving notice, it certainly could be added. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Fischer Posted January 11, 2022 at 03:51 AM Report Share Posted January 11, 2022 at 03:51 AM On 11/23/2020 at 10:14 AM, Gary Leach said: Previous notice is given at a monthly meeting of intent to make a motion at the next monthly meeting. At that next meeting, the member who gave the notice is absent. We already know what the motion was going to be because it was stated along with the notice. I assume it is permissible for some other member to make the motion, correct? On 11/23/2020 at 10:23 AM, Joshua Katz said: Yes. Yes. Yes, the process "start[s] over," but, just as before, the member giving notice need not be present to make the motion if someone else makes it. Would someone please save me from madness and cite where RONR states that the person who gave previous notice is not required to be the one who makes the motion at the meeting? I agree with this opinion but for the life of me I can't find it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted January 11, 2022 at 05:52 AM Report Share Posted January 11, 2022 at 05:52 AM On 1/10/2022 at 10:51 PM, Scott Fischer said: Would someone please save me from madness and cite where RONR states that the person who gave previous notice is not required to be the one who makes the motion at the meeting? I agree with this opinion but for the life of me I can't find it! I don't know if you're going to find that specifically stated. More to the point, RONR contains no suggestion that the motion must be made by the same person, although this is the most common case. Per 1:7, previous notice "means that notice of the proposal to be brought up—at least briefly describing its substance—must be announced at the preceding meeting or must be included in the “call” of the meeting at which it is to be considered (see also 10:44–51)." Throughout the work, previous notice means an announcement that the motion will be made, but nowhere is the announcement required to contain the identity of the person giving the notice or intending to move it. Accordingly, it is a well-established interpretation that the person giving the notice need not be present. In fact, even if the person giving notice should have a change of mind, and now firmly opposes the motion, the notice remains valid, and any other member may move it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted January 11, 2022 at 06:48 AM Report Share Posted January 11, 2022 at 06:48 AM I concur with Me. Novosielski’s comments immediately above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Katz Posted January 11, 2022 at 11:58 AM Report Share Posted January 11, 2022 at 11:58 AM As a general rule, it's unlikely to find statements in RONR that say "X is not the rule." It happens, but in general, it says what the rule is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Fischer Posted January 11, 2022 at 06:52 PM Report Share Posted January 11, 2022 at 06:52 PM (edited) Thank you, gents! I was sure I had seen it. I'll chalk this one up to a personally localized Mandela effect. Edited January 11, 2022 at 06:52 PM by Scott Fischer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted January 11, 2022 at 07:11 PM Report Share Posted January 11, 2022 at 07:11 PM Well, I would make reference to RONR (12th ed.) 1:4. Members have the basic right to make motions. That is the general rule. Where there is a rare, specific limitation to that general rule, it will be made clear in the proper place in the book, and the more general rule yields to the more specific rule. RONR (12th ed.) 56:68 (3). For example, in assemblies, only members who voted with the prevailing side are qualified to make the motion, Reconsider. This specific rule is given at RONR (12th ed.) 37:10, and, when it is relevant, it controls over the more general rule at 1:4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atul Kapur Posted January 11, 2022 at 08:31 PM Report Share Posted January 11, 2022 at 08:31 PM (edited) @Scott Fischer, I wonder if you are thinking of (and generalizing from) this provision that makes clear that the person who moves a motion to Reconsider, although it cannot be taken up at that time, does not have to be the person who later calls it up. "Although any member can call up the motion to Reconsider as just described, usually no one but the mover of the reconsideration calls it up on the day the motion is made—at least in cases where the session is to last beyond that day and there is no need for immediate action." RONR (12th ed.) 37:16 (emphasis added) Edited January 12, 2022 at 12:16 AM by Atul Kapur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted January 11, 2022 at 09:05 PM Report Share Posted January 11, 2022 at 09:05 PM No, Mr. Kapur, that was not the reason for my example. My example was exhibiting a more specific rule to which a more general rule yields. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atul Kapur Posted January 12, 2022 at 12:17 AM Report Share Posted January 12, 2022 at 12:17 AM (edited) As I have now clarified, I was responding to @Scott Fischer's posts, as my citation seems analogous to his example, rather than your post immediately preceding mine. Edited January 12, 2022 at 12:20 AM by Atul Kapur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts