Two Conventions, Two Mistakes

[Wright Stuff]

I just chaired my second-ever convention, and in reflecting on my performance, it occurred to me that I made a dumb mistake.

The report of the bylaws committee concluded with a motion to update the bylaws. The proposed amendment was properly noticed in advance of the convention, and a copy of the changes was included in the packet handed out to the delegates. 

After the motion to approve the changes was made, there was an amendment moved from the floor. During the discussion of that amendment, there was an amendment to the amendment from the floor. Upon reflection, I now believe that the first amendment from the floor was a secondary amendment since the committee’s motion was a (main) motion to amend the bylaws. If I’m correct, the motion to amend the amendment from the floor was actually a disallowed tertiary amendment. 

While both amendments from the floor were not controversial and passed unanimously, and while the way I handled it was efficient, I want to make sure that I fully understand this process to keep from potentially embarrassing myself in the future. Fortunately, no one in the room knew about the mistake or RONR in general. 

[Josh Martin]

On 3/3/2024 at 10:43 AM, Wright Stuff said:

After the motion to approve the changes was made, there was an amendment moved from the floor. During the discussion of that amendment, there was an amendment to the amendment from the floor. Upon reflection, I now believe that the first amendment from the floor was a secondary amendment since the committee’s motion was a (main) motion to amend the bylaws. If I’m correct, the motion to amend the amendment from the floor was actually a disallowed tertiary amendment. 

While both amendments from the floor were not controversial and passed unanimously, and while the way I handled it was efficient, I want to make sure that I fully understand this process to keep from potentially embarrassing myself in the future. Fortunately, no one in the room knew about the mistake or RONR in general. 

Your further reflection is mistaken, and your initial instinct was correct. You handled this matter correctly.

A motion to amend the bylaws is not a subsidiary motion to amend. It is a main motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted. A subsidiary motion to amend a motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted is a primary amendment, not a secondary amendment.

Edited March 3, 2024 at 04:51 PM by Josh Martin

[Atul Kapur]

I sometimes, to avoid this type of confusion between Amend and Amend Something Previously Adopted, refer to the bylaws amendment as "the proposal." It then becomes clear that the meeting can make and consider primary and secondary amendments to the proposal. 

[Wright Stuff]

@Josh Martin and @Atul Kapur, thanks for the responses. I’m happy about the answer. It’s frustrating because now, having heard the correct answer, I went back and read §12 and §35, and the answer is fairly obvious — once you already know the answer. I will confess that, as a beginner, it is very easy to read past the word “subsidiary” in §12.2. Now it jumps out at me!

[Gary Novosielski]

Yes, if only the Answers in life were as obvious before we knew them as they were afterward.

[Rob Elsman]

The "proposed amendment" was actually the incidental main motion, Rescind or Amend Something Previously Adopted.  Thus, the amendment to it was a primary amendment, and the amendment to the amendment was a secondary amendment.

The confusion arises from the name of the motion, Rescind or Amend Something Previously Adopted.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 3/3/2024 at 4:09 PM, Rob Elsman said:

The "proposed amendment" was actually the incidental main motion, Rescind or Amend Something Previously Adopted.  Thus, the amendment to it was a primary amendment, and the amendment to the amendment was a secondary amendment.

The confusion arises from the name of the motion, Rescind or Amend Something Previously Adopted.

Perhaps Rescind or Deform?