Hearing motions

[Guest Guest]

We are in a meeting and the next proposal is up and before a motion can be made on that proposal someone makes a motion to substitute their proposal and asks for a second.  Their proposal is asking to get rid of what the original proposal specifies and then goes on with details.  Is this a valid motion?  I was thinking that we had to have a motion on the topic first before you could entertain an amendment or substitution or whatever.  Clarification would be appreciated.

[Rob Elsman]

How did this "proposal" come to be "up"?

[Josh Martin]

52 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

We are in a meeting and the next proposal is up and before a motion can be made on that proposal someone makes a motion to substitute their proposal and asks for a second.  Their proposal is asking to get rid of what the original proposal specifies and then goes on with details.  Is this a valid motion?  I was thinking that we had to have a motion on the topic first before you could entertain an amendment or substitution or whatever.  Clarification would be appreciated.

Yes, it is certainly correct that a motion to amend (including a motion to substitute) is not in order if there is no motion to amend.

In such a circumstance, the chair should rule that the motion is out of order as it seeks to amend a motion which does not exist. The chair should then suggest that the member either a) wait until a motion has actually been made to adopt the proposal or b) reword his motion as a main motion, rather than as a motion to amend.

[Rob Elsman]

I'm not at all sure the motion that was made was a subsidiary motion to Amend.  The way I am reading it, a main motion had not been made and seconded before the chair recognized this other member, who, in my opinion, made the (original?) main motion.  That's why I am asking how this "proposal" came to be "up".  I do not understand it.

[Guest Guest]

To answer Rob E.'s question:  the Proposal was the next item on the Agenda and a motion had not been made yet on it.

Josh - thank you very much.  I understand the process much better now!!!

[Rob Elsman]

Thank you for the additional information.  "Someone's" motion was apparently in order.  It was a main motion.  He gets to make the motion because he rose and was recognized before other members.

The "proposal" can be offered as a subsidiary motion to Amend in the form of a substitute.

[Josh Martin]

11 hours ago, Rob Elsman said:

Thank you for the additional information.  "Someone's" motion was apparently in order.  It was a main motion.  He gets to make the motion because he rose and was recognized before other members.

The "proposal" can be offered as a subsidiary motion to Amend in the form of a substitute.

I certainly agree that the member could make his motion as a main motion, but it does not sound to me that it was worded in the form of a main motion.

[Guest Guest]

The exact wording was "I move to substitute the attached proposal and ask for a second".

[Gary Novosielski]

T

2 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

The exact wording was "I move to substitute the attached proposal and ask for a second".

That should have been ruled out of order as there was no motion pending, and therefore not open to amendment (whether in the nature of a substitute or otherwise).  It might also have been out of order even if properly phrased,  if it did not conform to the adopted agenda, which sounds likely.  

It sounds like the chair erred in allowing it.

[Bruce Lages]

One pertinent question may be how did this motion that was 'up' next get put on the agenda in the first place. If it was on the agenda because a member had given previous notice of the motion, then that member is entitled to preference in recognition when the agenda reaches that point (42:13, 4f), and the chair should not recognize another member first.

So, how did this motion get placed on the agenda?

[Guest Guest]

We follow what I believe to be a standard Order of Business for the Agenda.  Under the heading New Business, this was Proposal #1, submitted by the Chair.  As soon as we got to that point in the Order, the other member made the Motion above (to substitute etc..) before the Chair could chime in. 

[Rob Elsman]

Once again, we see that the use of an agenda has fouled things up to the point that no one, including me, can figure out what is going on.  On multiple occasions, on this forum, I have recommended that ordinary assemblies that meet at least as frequently as quarterly drop the use of an agenda.  The standard order of business can be used without an agenda.  So, save yourselves a lot of confusion and just drop the agenda thing.

[Gary Novosielski]

Amen.

[Guest Guest]

Ok.  I'm an idiot but as Secretary of the Club I've always put together an Agenda.  Are you saying we should not use an Agenda?  Just follow the order when we enter into session? 

 

[Gary Novosielski]

35 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

Ok.  I'm an idiot but as Secretary of the Club I've always put together an Agenda.  Are you saying we should not use an Agenda?  Just follow the order when we enter into session? 

 

Yes, an agenda is usually more trouble than it is worth, for ordinary societies.  There's no harm in handing out copies of the standard order of business, so people can follow along.

If you know some specific questions that are to be dealt with during the meeting, you can prepare notes for the chair's use according to the standard order, and that should be plenty.  

[Rob Elsman]

Yes.  Prepare a memorandum for the presiding officer listing the items of business in their assigned order.  Give it to him, but do not distribute it to the members unless the assembly instructs you to do so.

[Guest Guest]

Thank you very much.  I'll present that approach to the Chair/Board.  After doing business with a published Agenda since 2003, I can only imagine the push back I'll get....But I understand the benefit of NOT using an Agenda.

Thanks to everyone that responded!

 

[Daniel H. Honemann]

12 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

Thank you very much.  I'll present that approach to the Chair/Board.  After doing business with a published Agenda since 2003, I can only imagine the push back I'll get....But I understand the benefit of NOT using an Agenda.

Thanks to everyone that responded!

 

Just to be sure there is no mistake, what is being said here concerning the inadvisability of adoption of an agenda applies to organizations that have adopted RONR as their parliamentary authority and whose assemblies meet at least as frequently as quarterly. 

[Guest Guest]

This is what the Bylaws say:

Section 2. Board Meetings.

At meetings of the Board, the order of business, unless otherwise directed by majority vote of those present, shall be as follows: Minutes of Last Meeting Report of President Report of Secretary Report of Treasurer Report of Regional Directors Reports of Committees Unfinished Business Election of New Members New Business Adjournment

ARTICLE XI - PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY

The rules contained in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the Club in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with the Bylaws and any special rules of order the Club adopts.

 

[Daniel H. Honemann]

10 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

This is what the Bylaws say:

Section 2. Board Meetings.

At meetings of the Board, the order of business, unless otherwise directed by majority vote of those present, shall be as follows: Minutes of Last Meeting Report of President Report of Secretary Report of Treasurer Report of Regional Directors Reports of Committees Unfinished Business Election of New Members New Business Adjournment

ARTICLE XI - PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY

The rules contained in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the Club in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with the Bylaws and any special rules of order the Club adopts.

 

Based upon this additional information, it appears that the order of business for meetings of your board is governed by your bylaws and not by anything in RONR.

[Rob Elsman]

Hmm. It looks like no provision has been made for the Orders of the Day.  My guess is that main motions to postpone and subsidiary motions to postpone are not in order.  That's a little puzzling to me.

[Richard Brown]

13 minutes ago, Rob Elsman said:

Hmm. It looks like no provision has been made for the Orders of the Day.  My guess is that main motions to postpone and subsidiary motions to postpone are not in order.  That's a little puzzling to me.

Oh, I’m sure those motions are permissible, they will probably just be taken up at some other point in the meeting that the society desires, such as unfinished business or new business. They can interpret their own bylaws or suspend the rules and put those items wherever they want to. 

[Shmuel Gerber]

6 hours ago, Rob Elsman said:

Hmm. It looks like no provision has been made for the Orders of the Day.  My guess is that main motions to postpone and subsidiary motions to postpone are not in order.  That's a little puzzling to me.

41:46 Relation of Orders of the Day to the Established Order of Business. In assemblies that follow the “standard” order of business explained above, orders of the day for a given session, day, or meeting that are not set for particular hours are taken up under the headings of Special Orders and Unfinished Business and General Orders (see 41:18–26). In cases where an ordinary society has adopted its own order of business for regular meetings, it usually includes similar headings covering such orders of the day. Where an organization’s order of business does not provide such headings, special orders not set for particular hours are taken up before unfinished business and general orders, or (if there are neither of these), at all events before new business. Under the same conditions, general orders are taken up after any unfinished business (that is, business pending at the adjournment of the previous meeting, if any, and orders of the day not disposed of at the time of its adjournment), and before new business unless a later hour is specified (see below).

 

[Rob Elsman]

Ah! Thank you, Mr. Gerber.  I had completely forgotten this.