An amendment that is not logistically feasible

[Pastor Tim]

At our recent Annual Meeting, delegates considered an item of business to create a committee that we call in the 5th year of every decade to assess the performance of the organization. We were discussing the creation of the committee this year to give our general membership a good understanding of the importance of this committee's work, and to begin submitting nominations for next year's ballot.

A delegate proposed an amendment for this committee to be called at our Annual Meeting in 2024 and to begin their work 1 year earlier. This amendment (which was ultimately defeated) would have created nearly insurmountable logistical challenges: mostly that there was insufficient time to nominate and approve a committee so quickly, and attempting to do so might have had the effect of missing out on qualified people (who may, for instance, be on vacation and not able to receive the invitation to be nominated). It is reasonable to think that it could take a month or more to have sufficient nominations for this committee, due to the technical nature of their work.

Two questions:

• What does one do if a deliberative body considers or approves a recommendation that simply cannot be accomplished?
• Is there a way to declare such an amendment or motion out of order on grounds such as these? 

[Gary Novosielski]

Well, yes, if a motion proposes an action that is clearly absurd or literally impossible, then it can be ruled out of order on that basis.

But it is not at all clear that the motion you used in your example would fall into that category.  Your use of the words nearly, mostly, might, may, and could, indicate that this is a situation that is subject to quite a lot of wiggle room, and might seem difficult to accomplish, but still in order.

[Atul Kapur]

To reinforce the above reply, there is a big difference between (a) a motion being impossible to execute, and (b) it being extremely difficult to execute and will be done poorly. (B) are good arguments to make against adopting the motion / amendment, but don't cross the threshold and become out of order.

As Miracle Max (from The Princess Bride) says:

Quote

There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one thing you can do.

 

What's that?

 

Go through his clothes and look for loose change.

 

Parliamentary Procedure doesn't protect your organization from making a bad decision, as long as it's made properly.

Edited July 1, 2024 at 05:18 PM by Atul Kapur

[Richard Brown]

On 7/1/2024 at 10:48 AM, Pastor Tim said:

What does one do if a deliberative body considers or approves a recommendation that simply cannot be accomplished?

I agree with my colleagues as to how to handle a proposed motion or amendment that is unworkable. However, if the body actually adopts such a motion, The society will be stuck with it, unless it either rescinds or amends the unwise motion or if it is perhaps something which constitutes a continuing breach and can later be ruled null and void. 

[Gary Novosielski]

The arguments you proposed against adopting this amendment would be appropriate to raise during debate rather than trying to use them to declare something null and void.

The fact that the amendment was defeated is the sound of the system working.