Unclear/vague motions

[Guest Brittany Walker]

Where a person mis-speaks in making a motion.  For example, the Agenda item is approval of the committee mascot, and somebody says  Motion to approve the committee "mask" is there a rule that says that the intent of the motion was clearly to approve a mascot and not a "mask." In other words, is there a rule that where a motion is unclear the motion is governed by the intent of the circumstances?

Thanks!

Brittany

[Josh Martin]

7 minutes ago, Guest Brittany Walker said:

For example, the Agenda item is approval of the committee mascot, and somebody says  Motion to approve the committee "mask" is there a rule that says that the intent of the motion was clearly to approve a mascot and not a "mask." In other words, is there a rule that where a motion is unclear the motion is governed by the intent of the circumstances?

What happened next? Did the chair say "mask" or "mascot" when stating the question and putting the question? The wording used when the chair puts the question is the definitive wording of the motion.

As to the general question, the assembly should try to adopt clear motions. In the event that an unclear motion is adopted, I agree that the motion should be governed by intent, to the extent that this can be determined.

But that's not actually what happened here. There isn't anything unclear about a motion "to approve the committee mask," it just (presumably) is not the word the member intended to use. The actual language of the motion, however, is clear and unambiguous. If the assembly adopts a motion "to approve the committee mask," then I do not think it is reasonable to interpret "mask" as meaning "mascot." The assembly should correct these errors when they occur. If the assembly failed to do so, then it will need to correct the motion at a future meeting.

Edited March 22, 2021 at 10:52 PM by Josh Martin