Deny a Motion/Vote

[Guest Reluctant Leader]

I run a national organization and board. Recently a motion was made in a meeting to state a date/deadline for a task. It did not seem “motion worthy” for lack of a better word, but the member insisted. A vote took place and it passed to keep the peace.

We now have an upcoming meeting and similarly it has been brought to my attention that a motion may be requested which is superfluous by a persistent, disruptive member. As chair, can I deny the motion or not entertain it? On what grounds?

Background: The motion is defamatory, they believe I have abused my office as chair by accepting a current board member as a volunteer for a task while we are in the midst of a hiring process for a  marketing position. Our bylaws do not explicitly prevent this, but the disruptive member has decided this is the hill to die. They have been problematic since their term of leadership ended.

 Any advice?

[Richard Brown]

On 10/5/2022 at 2:06 PM, Guest Reluctant Leader said:

We now have an upcoming meeting and similarly it has been brought to my attention that a motion may be requested which is superfluous by a persistent, disruptive member. As chair, can I deny the motion or not entertain it? On what grounds?

In my opinion, based on what you have told us, no, you cannot refuse to recognize the member or refuse to entertain the motion.  There are reasons why some motions might be out of order, but I see nothing so far that would say that is the case here.  If the motion is defamatory or makes allegations disparaging the character of a member, it might be out of order, but I don't think that is the case here.  If the motion is not needed or the members don't want it adopted, the thing to do is for you to permit him to make his motion and let the membership debate it and then vote on it.  If it has no support, it will surely be voted down.  The members have the ultimate decision.

If you truly believe the motion is out of order, please tell us more about it and why you think it should not be permitted.  BTW, if you do rule the motion out of order, the member (as long as someone seconds his appeal) can appeal your ruling to the assembly (the membership).  The appeal is usually debatable, but under special rules, and it requires a majority vote to overturn the ruling of the chair.

[puzzling]

On 10/5/2022 at 8:06 PM, Guest Reluctant Leader said:

I run a national organization and board. Recently a motion was made in a meeting to state a date/deadline for a task. It did not seem “motion worthy” for lack of a better word, but the member insisted. A vote took place and it passed to keep the peace.

We now have an upcoming meeting and similarly it has been brought to my attention that a motion may be requested which is superfluous by a persistent, disruptive member. As chair, can I deny the motion or not entertain it? On what grounds?

Background: The motion is defamatory, they believe I have abused my office as chair by accepting a current board member as a volunteer for a task while we are in the midst of a hiring process for a  marketing position. Our bylaws do not explicitly prevent this, but the disruptive member has decided this is the hill to die. They have been problematic since their term of leadership ended.

 Any advice?

In addition to Mr Brown's reply

Note that you should give up the chair during the consideration of the motion. (see RONR  43:29) 

If there is a vice president,  brief him before the meeting so that it all can be done in a smooth way.

I am a bit puzzling on ehen exactly to relinquish the chair and what words to use.

I guess it is best to relinquish yhe chair between the seconding  of the motion  and the stating of the motion by the (replacing ) chair

A: I move to condone the action of the chair 

B: second

You (as chair):

There is a motion made and seconded to consider the condemnation as the chair.  (or whatever the exact motion is) as  I  cannot be impartiality chair this debate I turn the chair over to the vice president D.

 D : I take over the chair from (you) to chair this meeting for consideration of followng motion made and seconded: (repeats the motion)

After this A: gets the floor first to debate and explain the motion.

then you or another member who is against the motion gets the floor.

the above needs to be included verbatim in the  minutes. (you giving up the chair is a ruling) 

It is all not nice , but it is best if it all happens in a smooth orderly and dispassionate manner.

please study RONR 42 and 43 and especially RONR 43:19-21 and  43:29 carefully.

do brief the vice president beforehand  and hope for the best.

this is not the time to improvise,  just try to follow RONR to the letter. 

good luck

 

[Richard Brown]

On 10/5/2022 at 4:52 PM, puzzling said:

the above needs to be included verbatim in the  minutes. (you giving up the chair is a ruling) 

Note: the MOTION goes in the minutes, but not the discussion or debate! The fact that the vice president assumed the chair might also be noted in the minutes.

[puzzling]

On 10/5/2022 at 10:57 PM, Richard Brown said:

Note: the MOTION goes in the minutes, but not the discussion or debate! The fact that the vice president assumed the chair might also be noted in the minutes.

you are correct I should have been more succinct   my point was that the relinquishing of the chair and the handover of the chair to the vice president need to be recorded in the minutes. Do you agree with the exact moment for and wording of the handover? RONR is a bit lacking in detail here. 

[Josh Martin]

On 10/5/2022 at 2:06 PM, Guest Reluctant Leader said:

We now have an upcoming meeting and similarly it has been brought to my attention that a motion may be requested which is superfluous by a persistent, disruptive member. As chair, can I deny the motion or not entertain it? On what grounds?

No. In fact, since the motion involves you personally, you should not do anything with this motion. You should relinquish the chair to the Vice President.

"Whenever a motion is made that refers only to the presiding officer in a capacity not shared in common with other members, or that commends or censures him with others, he should turn the chair over to the vice-president or appropriate temporary occupant (see below) during the assembly’s consideration of that motion, just as he would in a case where he wishes to take part in debate (see also 43:29–30)." RONR (12th ed.) 47:10

I also do not see any basis from the facts presented for the Vice President to rule the motion out of order. There is maybe something to work with with this claim that the motion is "defamatory," but without knowing more facts about why the motion is believed to be defamatory, I cannot say for certain.

"For the protection of parties who may be innocent, the first resolution should avoid details as much as possible. An individual member may not prefer charges, even if that member has proof of an officer’s or member’s wrongdoing. If a member introduces a resolution preferring charges unsupported by an investigating committee’s recommendation, the chair must rule the resolution out of order, informing the member that it would instead be in order to move the appointment of such a committee (by a resolution, as in the example above). A resolution is improper if it implies the truth of specific rumors or contains insinuations unfavorable to an officer or member, even one who is to be accused. It is out of order, for example, for a resolution to begin, “Whereas, It seems probable that the treasurer has engaged in graft,…” At the first mention of the word “graft” in such a case, the chair must instantly call to order the member attempting to move the resolution." RONR (12th ed.) 63:11

On 10/5/2022 at 2:06 PM, Guest Reluctant Leader said:

Background: The motion is defamatory, they believe I have abused my office as chair by accepting a current board member as a volunteer for a task while we are in the midst of a hiring process for a  marketing position. Our bylaws do not explicitly prevent this, but the disruptive member has decided this is the hill to die. They have been problematic since their term of leadership ended.

Notwithstanding that the bylaws do not prevent this, the board could certainly adopt a motion censuring you for this if it wished to do so, which appears to be what this motion is. If you are correct that this member is on his own here, then the motion will not be successful, but he still has the right to make it. Potentially, however, depending on what is in the motion which is "defamatory," it may be necessary for the member to reword the motion first.

[Gary Novosielski]

The verbiage you suggest is a little bit too verbish, I think.

The chair should, upon hearing the motion (and I think, also the second) should simply say, "I call upon the vice president to preside in this matter".

The VP assumes the chair and dives right in:  "The question is on the motion to <stating motion>  Mr. Problemann <maker of the motion> is recognized."

No explanations are required, and after the motion is disposed of, the VP returns to his seat, and the president resumes the chair, and says "The next item of business is..."  I don't think anything else is necessary.

Yes, the secretary should record the changes of presiding officer whenever they occur, such as "The vice president assumed the chair", or "The president assumed the chair."

Reasons are not needed and would probably be obvious upon reading the motion in the minutes.

Edited October 5, 2022 at 11:29 PM by Gary Novosielski
Change when motion is stated.

[Atul Kapur]

On 10/5/2022 at 7:01 PM, Josh Martin said:

In fact, since the motion involves you personally, you should not do anything with this motion. You should relinquish the chair to the Vice President.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, I disagree and say that the chair should state the motion then turn over the chair. I draw a parallel to 62:11n4 which says, referring to a motion to declare the chair vacant:

Quote

Once such a motion is made and seconded, the chair must state it, and then, since it
refers to the presiding officer in a capacity not shared in common with other members,
the chair must be turned over to the secretary or secretary pro tem. The new
occupant of the chair then presides during consideration of the motion [emphasis added]

This also aligns with 47:10 which states that the chair "should turn the chair over to the vice-president or appropriate temporary occupant (see below) during the assembly’s consideration of that motion" [emphasis added]

Edited October 6, 2022 at 12:54 AM by Atul Kapur

[Atul Kapur]

On 10/5/2022 at 3:06 PM, Guest Reluctant Leader said:

Recently a motion was made in a meeting to state a date/deadline for a task. It did not seem “motion worthy” for lack of a better word, but the member insisted. A vote took place and it passed to keep the peace.

I am not sure why this is not "motion worthy." The assembly has the right to set a deadline. Now that the motion has been adopted, the assembly has the right to enforce the deadline and, if it is missed, the person(s) responsible may be subject to censure or discipline. 
Your interpretation of why the motion was adopted doesn't change this. "The peace" would have been just as easily kept (for the remainder of that meeting, at least) if the motion had been defeated, because the issue was decided.

On 10/5/2022 at 3:06 PM, Guest Reluctant Leader said:

The motion is defamatory, they believe I have abused my office as chair

Whether it's defamatory sounds like a legal question. It would certainly be in order to make a motion to censure the chair for [the particular action(s) taken]. 

On 10/5/2022 at 5:52 PM, puzzling said:

I am a bit puzzling on ehen exactly to relinquish the chair and what words to use.

I guess it is best to relinquish yhe chair between the seconding  of the motion  and the stating of the motion by the (replacing ) chair

As stated in the response posted immediately above, the time is immediately after stating the question.

Edited October 6, 2022 at 12:53 AM by Atul Kapur

[Josh Martin]

On 10/5/2022 at 7:43 PM, Atul Kapur said:

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, I disagree and say that the chair should state the motion then turn over the chair. I draw a parallel to 62:11n4 which says, referring to a motion to declare the chair vacant:

I have no disagreement with this. I agree that I was overstating it a bit to say the char should not do "anything" with the motion.

Edited October 6, 2022 at 11:04 AM by Josh Martin

[Guest Guest Reluctant Leader]

Thank you all! Very informative and an education. This is a young board and has been fraught with issues (procedural and personalities) and you’ve been very helpful and insightful!