Interpretation of Tabling a motion

[John Douglas]

 

A presentation was given to our committee. A motion was on the table to receive the presentation as information. Another committee member brought forward a new motion asking that the committee move the issue to new business which was moved and seconded. When we got to new business the motion was brought forward for information and referral to another committee. My question is by moving the item to new business is this considered Tabling the issue or is the original motion orphaned and requires to be brought back for disposal at our next meeting in Old business. 

 

During the course of our meeting, we had a presentation to our committee. A motion was made to accept the presentation as information and was moved and seconded. Another Committee member made a second motion to move this item to New Business. The Chair accepted this motion and asked for a seconder. This motion was voted on and carried.

When the committee got into new business, a motion was brought forward that stated to have the report from the presentation received as information  and referred to another committee to alleviate the issues presented. 

My question is by moving the issue to new business would this be considered a subsidiary motion the same as "laying the issue on the table" or is the original motion orphaned and still has to be dealt with in the next meeting.?

 

 

Z
 

[Richard Brown]

8 hours ago, John Douglas said:

A presentation was given to our committee. A motion was on the table to receive the presentation as information. Another committee member brought forward a new motion asking that the committee move the issue to new business which was moved and seconded. . . .

Why was there a motion to “receive” the report in the first place? No such motion is necessary or in order unless the intent is to adopt the report as the official report of the committee, in which case the motion should be to do just that. Once a report is given it has already been received and all that is in order is a “Thank you for your report, Mr. Smith”. “The next order of business is the report from the grounds committee “. 

Btw, I’m not sure what you meant when you said the report was “in the table”, but I assume you meant it was “on the floor”.  Per RONR, something “on the table” has been temporarily set aside to take up something more pressing. 

As to.”postponing” the unnecessary motion to “accept” “receive” the report to new business, making a motion related to a report may be taken up in new business, but it is more commonly and appropriately done immediately after the report is presented. In my opinion what the committee did was to postpone the motion to new business rather than laying it on the table. 

Edited January 31, 2021 at 11:20 AM by Richard Brown
Correction in the 3rd paragraph as indicated.

[Joshua Katz]

12 hours ago, John Douglas said:

My question is by moving the issue to new business would this be considered a subsidiary motion the same as "laying the issue on the table" or is the original motion orphaned and still has to be dealt with in the next meeting.?

 

I don't quite understand the situation or the question, but my advice would be not to worry about this. The report was "received" and something was referred. I don't see any actions that need to be taken at the next meeting for procedural reasons, regardless of what procedural errors may have taken place at the previous meeting.

[John Douglas]

Sorry about the double post, but I thought the bottom didn't get posted when I posted the first time. The screen only refreshed in the middle of a sentence on the first post.

Thanks for the responses, I was observing this meeting as it was my first meeting with this organization to get the feel for how they do things. After this meeting I received an inquiry about the procedure being out of order from one of the members.

Because there is or could be action to be taken from the presentation by the committee that could involve costs it is customary for our committees to receive the reports as information and refer to others if required. Also the committee likes to acknowledge the people who present formally so it gets recorded in the minutes. This has been a standard practice for municipal government for many years.

I saw what happened as a postponement, but as stated, I am used to dealing with the disposition of this portion of the meeting  immediately after all delegations have been heard. Usually each delegation is dealt with individually after they have all presented because as I stated above it may be referred for further action.

Thanks for the additional insight as I was struggling how to phrase my response to the complaint. It is my belief a friendly amendment would've sufficed.

[Richard Brown]

Per section 51:15 and 51:16 of RONR,  there is no need for a motion to accept  or receive a report which has just been given. Once it has been given or presented, whether verbally or in writing, it has in fact been received. All that is in order is for the chair to say,  “thank you for the report, Mr. Smith“.  However, if the report was in writing, there could be a motion that the report they kept on file, but such would normally be the case, anyway. 

 

Edited January 31, 2021 at 07:43 PM by Richard Brown
Added citation to RONR and made typographical correction

[Guest Zev]

The OP John Douglas is probably using the expression "on the table" in the British sense, in that the item has been added to the agenda of items waiting to be considered and has nothing to do with an attempt to postpone. But this is only a guess.

The OP also tells us that "This has been a standard practice for municipal government for many years" which suggests to me at least, that this may be a public body rather than a private organization that would have its own rules established on how business is handled and what is or is not in order as a procedural matter would have everything to do with those rules and not Robert's.

[Rob Elsman]

I got the same impression as Zev.