Motions and time limits

[ranitamia]

Context first: I was in the audience of a membership meeting where the chair was leading. There was a separate person assigned as a Parliamentarian. During new business, a member asked to be recognized to make a motion. He was called upon by the chair to go ahead. At this time, he had a team of his staff (non members) pass around handouts to the audience. The multiple page document contained his concerns (it read like an op-Ed) followed by a concluding written question to the board. At the end of the document was two motions which were substantiated by the previous pages of commentary. The person read all 10 pages of his document which took about 30 minutes. He finally got to his motion that passed. My question is, when one makes a motion, how much time are they allotted to support or describe said motion? Should this person have been allowed to read all 10 pages from the floor without interruption from the chair? Granted, there are no time limit stipulations in the bylaws; however, the meeting ran well overtime and neither the parliamentarian or chair disallowed the conduct. 

[Atul Kapur]

Any member could have raised a point of order. See RONR (12th ed.) 4:7-8

"When necessary, a motion can be prefaced by a few words of explanation, which must not become a speech . . . .

For a member to begin to discuss a matter while no question is pending, without promptly leading to a motion, implies an unusual circumstance and requires permission of the assembly (see 33:22) in addition to obtaining the floor. In larger assemblies, this rule requires firm enforcement. In smaller meetings, it may sometimes be relaxed with constructive effect if the members are not accustomed to working under the standard rule. Unless the assembly has specifically authorized that a particular subject be discussed while no motion is pending, however, such a discussion can be entered into only at the sufferance of the chair or until a point of order is made; and in the latter case, the chair must immediately require that a motion be offered or the discussion cease." (Emphasis added)

[Alicia Percell, PRP]

If you look back just prior to the 33:22 citation given above, you'll find this in 33:20:

"Request to Read Papers. If any member objects, a member has no right to read from—or to have the secretary read from—any paper or book as a part of his speech without permission of the assembly. This rule is a protection against the use of reading as a means of prolonging debate and delaying business. It is customary, however, to permit members to read short, pertinent, printed extracts in debate so long as they do not abuse the privilege. If a member wishes to do so, he can, while speaking in debate, say, “If there is no objection, I would like to read… [indicating the nature and length of the paper].” The member can then begin to read unless another member objects.17 In such a case, at any time until the speaker has finished reading, another member can interrupt him by an objection, which must be addressed to the chair. Or, if the speaker desiring to read prefers, he can formally request permission: “Mr. President, I ask permission to read a statement… [briefly describing it, as above]”; and the chair then asks if there is objection. In either case, if there is an objection, the chair can, of his own accord, put the question on granting permission, or any member can move “that permission to read a paper in debate be granted.” This motion requires no second unless moved by the member who made the request. Action of the assembly granting a request to read a paper can be reconsidered at any time until the reading has been concluded."

I'll go ahead and include these other two references, though please note they are in the context of debating a PENDING MOTION, so they're not exactly on point for the no-pending-motion situation you describe.  Even so, know that introducing a motion first doesn't give one free reign to babble endlessly.

4:29:

"Without the permission of the assembly, no one can speak longer than permitted by the rules of the body—or, in a nonlegislative assembly that has no rule of its own relating to the length of speeches, longer than ten minutes."

43:8:

"Maximum Time for Each Speech. In a nonlegislative body or organization that has no special rule relating to the length of speeches (2), a member, having obtained the floor while a debatable motion is immediately pending, can speak no longer than ten minutes unless he obtains the consent of the assembly. Such permission can be given by unanimous consent (4:58–63), or by means of a motion to Extend Limits of Debate (15), which requires a two-thirds vote without debate."

[Lori Lukinuk]

On 10/11/2022 at 7:10 PM, ranitamia said:

neither the parliamentarian or chair disallowed the conduct

I agree with A. Kapur, I would like to note however that the parliamentarian advises the chair and therefore it is not their role to disallow the conduct but rather to advise the chair. The chair choses to accept that advice or not.