Motion to Postpone Indefinitely

[Guest Johnathan]

When a Motion to Postpone Indefinitely succeeds, how does the main motion get back on the agenda?  I want to Postpone Indefinitely a main motion that will come up next Tuesday but I would be willing to address the main motion after the general election in November.   (A motion to Postpone to a certain time will not work because we meet twice a month.)  

[Gary Novosielski]

On 4/2/2024 at 5:45 PM, Guest Johnathan said:

When a Motion to Postpone Indefinitely succeeds, how does the main motion get back on the agenda?  I want to Postpone Indefinitely a main motion that will come up next Tuesday but I would be willing to address the main motion after the general election in November.   (A motion to Postpone to a certain time will not work because we meet twice a month.)  

And because November is more than a quarterly interval away, so you can't postpone definitely till then anyway.

So you can Postpone Indefinitely, or simply vote the motion down.   Postpone Indefinitely only kills the motion for the duration of the current session, so it can be made again pretty much any time you like—such as in November.

[Josh Martin]

On 4/2/2024 at 4:45 PM, Guest Johnathan said:

When a Motion to Postpone Indefinitely succeeds, how does the main motion get back on the agenda?

The same way you would put any other item on the agenda.

Edited April 2, 2024 at 10:40 PM by Josh Martin

[Rob Elsman]

A main motion that has been permanently disposed of at one session can be renewed at any later session.  Since this assembly meets frequently, the motion should be made again when the New Business heading is reached in the assembly's established order of business for the meeting.  The assembly almost certainly should drop the whole agenda thing, since the assembly already has an order of business without approving an agenda at each meeting.

[Guest Johnthan]

We have a maverick who will not take "No" for an answer, even though he does not have the votes to succeed.   We have an agenda for every meeting which is published 24 hours before the meeting and any member can put an item of new business on the agenda prior to the 24 hour deadline.  He puts this matter on the agenda for every meeting.  How do we put an end to this incessant annoyance?

[Rob Elsman]

Don't elect him to office anymore.

[Josh Martin]

On 4/3/2024 at 7:40 AM, Guest Johnthan said:

We have a maverick who will not take "No" for an answer, even though he does not have the votes to succeed.   We have an agenda for every meeting which is published 24 hours before the meeting and any member can put an item of new business on the agenda prior to the 24 hour deadline.  He puts this matter on the agenda for every meeting.  How do we put an end to this incessant annoyance?

Several ideas occur to me, although there are quite likely others.

• You could amend the organization's rule which provides "any member can put an item of new business on the agenda prior to the 24 hour deadline."
• It is not clear to me whether this rule prevents the assembly from amending the agenda to remove the item in question. But even supposing it does, the assembly could amend the agenda so it is the last item on the agenda, and then immediately adjourn before considering the item.
• When the item is reached and the persistent member makes the motion, a member could immediately move to Object to Consideration of the Question, which requires a 2/3 vote and will suppress the question for the duration of the current session. (The advantage of this over the Previous Question is that it can be moved before even the motion maker has an opportunity to speak.)
• The organization could adopt special rules of order providing a longer "waiting period" for a defeated motion to be brought before the assembly again (perhaps with some workarounds built-in in case a legitimate need arises to consider a defeated motion again).

Edited April 3, 2024 at 04:26 PM by Josh Martin

[Dan Honemann]

On 4/3/2024 at 12:25 PM, Josh Martin said:

Several ideas occur to me, although there are quite likely others.

• You could amend the organization's rule which provides "any member can put an item of new business on the agenda prior to the 24 hour deadline."
• It is not clear to me whether this rule prevents the assembly from amending the agenda to remove the item in question. But even supposing it does, the assembly could amend the agenda so it is the last item on the agenda, and then immediately adjourn before considering the item.
• When the item is reached and the persistent member makes the motion, a member could immediately move to Object to Consideration of the Question, which requires a 2/3 vote and will suppress the question for the duration of the current session. (The advantage of this over the Previous Question is that it can be moved before even the motion maker has an opportunity to speak.)
• The organization could adopt special rules of order providing a longer "waiting period" for a defeated motion to be brought before the assembly again (perhaps with some workarounds built-in in case a legitimate need arises to consider a defeated motion again).

The third suggestion should be enough assuming the undesired motion is an original main motion.  Changing the rules in any respect just because of this nuisance seems to be overkill.

[J. J.]

On 4/3/2024 at 1:40 PM, Dan Honemann said:

The third suggestion should be enough assuming the undesired motion is an original main motion.  Changing the rules in any respect just because of this nuisance seems to be overkill.

While I may end up agreeing with you, it is the members' call (provided enough of them will support it). 

[Gary Novosielski]

On 4/3/2024 at 7:40 AM, Guest Johnthan said:

We have a maverick who will not take "No" for an answer, even though he does not have the votes to succeed.   We have an agenda for every meeting which is published 24 hours before the meeting and any member can put an item of new business on the agenda prior to the 24 hour deadline.  He puts this matter on the agenda for every meeting.  How do we put an end to this incessant annoyance?

Do people keep seconding his motion every time?  If so then I guess somebody thinks it's worth of considering.

[Josh Martin]

On 4/3/2024 at 12:40 PM, Dan Honemann said:

The third suggestion should be enough assuming the undesired motion is an original main motion.  Changing the rules in any respect just because of this nuisance seems to be overkill.

Yes, thank you for the clarification. The third suggestion will only be an option if this is an original main motion.