Unfinished business and special meetings

[J. J.]

On 8/18/2023 at 2:28 PM, Dan Honemann said:

I'm quite sure that Mr. Gerber says no such thing.

So am I.  I was quoting you. 

Mr. Gerber did post:

On 8/18/2023 at 3:02 PM, Shmuel Gerber said:

But that sentence in 41:40 is not applicable, because, as you noted, the item becomes the first item under unfinished business (or an unfinished special order). Unfinished business is unfinished business, not a general order or a special order.

 

I think his observation is valid.

[Rob Elsman]

RONR (12th ed.) 41:3 seems clear to me that items of business that are classified as unfinished business are not orders of the day, since the division of orders of the day are only general orders and special orders. Were it otherwise, unfinished business would be expected to be listed as a third class.

Edited August 18, 2023 at 08:51 PM by Rob Elsman

[Dan Honemann]

On 8/18/2023 at 4:29 PM, Rob Elsman said:

RONR (12th ed.) 41:3 seems clear to me that items of business that are classified as unfinished business are not orders of the day, since the division of orders of the day are only general orders and special orders. Were it otherwise, unfinished business would be expected to be listed as a third division.

I cannot agree that this is at all correct, but it appears that I am fighting a losing battle with a number of good parliamentarians, including one of my esteemed colleagues.

I think it best that I quit at this point because I seem to be simply repeating myself, all to no avail.  Before I do, however, I want to point out that I am fully aware that 41:42 makes no mention of motions pending at time of adjournment, but I do not find this to be dispositive. 

[Dan Honemann]

On 8/18/2023 at 5:04 PM, Dan Honemann said:

I cannot agree that this is at all correct, but it appears that I am fighting a losing battle with a number of good parliamentarians, including one of my esteemed colleagues.

I think it best that I quit at this point because I seem to be simply repeating myself, all to no avail.  Before I do, however, I want to point out that I am fully aware that 41:42 makes no mention of motions pending at time of adjournment, but I do not find this to be dispositive. 

It occurs to me that this discussion may have gotten sidetracked a bit by the question as to whether or not a motion due to come up under 41:23(a) is an order of the day.  It has been asserted that it is not an order of the day, and hence the last sentence of 41:40 is inapplicable.

Assuming only for the sake of argument that this is correct*, the fact remains that due to the action which was taken by the assembly at its preceding meeting, the question pending at the time of adjournment of that meeting became an item of business scheduled to be taken up at the next regular meeting at the time prescribed by the assembly's adopted order of business.  Under the rules in 41:37-39, it cannot be taken up prior to that time except by suspending the rules by a two-thirds vote.  It has been asserted that, since a special meeting is not governed by the order of business for regular meetings, the rules in 41:37-39 are inapplicable.  I can find no justification for this assertion.  The special meeting will have its own agenda, but this does not confer upon it the power to override the action previously taken by the assembly in fixing the time when the motion is to be taken up. The rule for taking a question from the table at a special meeting called for that purpose differs due to the fact that a question laid on the table has not been made an item of business scheduled to be taken up at the next regular meeting at a prescribed time.  

-------------------------------------

*  The first two paragraphs under "Orders of the Day" on page 133 of PL are instructive in this regard. The first sentence of the first paragraph reads as follows: "The order of business adopted by the society as modified by the making of special orders for the meeting, or postponing questions to the meeting, constitutes the Orders of the Day for that meeting."

[Shmuel Gerber]

On 9/5/2023 at 2:38 PM, Dan Honemann said:

It occurs to me that this discussion may have gotten sidetracked a bit by the question as to whether or not a motion due to come up under 41:23(a) is an order of the day.  It has been asserted that it is not an order of the day, and hence the last sentence of 41:40 is inapplicable.

Assuming only for the sake of argument that this is correct*, the fact remains that due to the action which was taken by the assembly at its preceding meeting, the question pending at the time of adjournment of that meeting became an item of business scheduled to be taken up at the next regular meeting at the time prescribed by the assembly's adopted order of business.  Under the rules in 41:37-39, it cannot be taken up prior to that time except by suspending the rules by a two-thirds vote.  It has been asserted that, since a special meeting is not governed by the order of business for regular meetings, the rules in 41:37-39 are inapplicable.  I can find no justification for this assertion.  The special meeting will have its own agenda, but this does not confer upon it the power to override the action previously taken by the assembly in fixing the time when the motion is to be taken up.

I should again say that my previous comments (aside from the issue about the last sentence of 41:40) were largely for the sake of discussion, so I don't necessarily disagree with this.  But here is another argument. 

RONR 41:23 says, "The heading of Unfinished Business and General Orders includes items of business in the four categories that are listed below in the order in which they are taken up. Of these, the first three constitute “Unfinished Business,” while the fourth consists of “General Orders”:
a) The question that was pending when the previous meeting adjourned, if that meeting adjourned while a question other than a special order was pending. …"

Notice that it says, "the previous meeting," not "the previous regular meeting". So if a special meeting intervenes, the question that was pending when the previous meeting adjourned is no longer the question that was pending when the previous regular meeting adjourned. 🙂