Recess at a meeting without a quorum

[Guest George Mervosh]

Obviously I mean yes, it's debatable."

[Guest George Mervosh]

I'd say yes. The merits of recessing vs. one of the other options allowed would be the subject of debate."

[Guest J. J.]

I'm looking p. 337, l. 1-3. It says the SDC apply, and on all three of the motions the SDC's state that they are undebatable.

All three could be debatable main motions (though rarely for Adjourn), and Recess and FTTWTA, easily could be main moti"

[Guest George Mervosh]

If they're main motions, they're debatable."

[Guest J. J.]

>>If they're main motions, they're debatable. <<

In a quorate meeting, yes. Even some normally debatable main motions, i.e. a motion "That we contact absent members," are NOT debatable at a meeting without a quorum (p. 337)"

[Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle]

As I read it, I think "such motions" refers only to motions to obtain a quorum and not to the first three permissible motions."

[Guest J. J.]

The actual quote is: "The first three motions are governed by the Standard Descriptive Characteristics given for them in the numbered sections indicated."

Those SDC's all state that those motions are undebatable, specifically.

"

[Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle]

I may be missing something but the motion to recess, when no business is pending, is debatable. And, at an inquorate meeting, it seems likely no question would be pending."

[Guest J. J.]

Normally, a motion to recess, when no business is pending, is debatable, and would be a main motion, at a meeting with a quorum.

What I'm looking at is the standard when a motion to recess is made, when no business is pending, is made at a meetin"

[Guest Rob Elsman]

You've raised a very interesting point.

Still, I think the controlling rule is RONR (10th ed.), p. 223, ll. 6-12."

[Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle]

Just so I'm clear on this:

The main motion to recess, when no question is pending, is debatable.

The motion to recess is one of four motions permissible at an inquorate meeting. Further, it is one of the first three motions that are unaf"

[Guest J. J.]

I'm far from sure. The inquorate meeting is a very specific case.

The fourth possibility, "take measures to obtain a quorum," deals with what would always be debatable motions in the context of a quorate meeting. In the context of an "

[Guest Rob Elsman]

"...it very clearly is NOT a debatable motion."

That's not so clear to me, if the motion is made when no other question is pending, notwithstanding what is said on p. 337."

[Guest J. J.]

It should be:

"Such motions are out of order when another has the floor; must be seconded; are not debatable; are amendable (any amendment being undebatable in accordance with the general rule); require a majority vote; and can be reconsider"

[Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle]

Again, "such motions" refers only to motions to obtain a quorum, not to the first three permissible motions. Those remain unaffected by the absence of a quorum.

"

[Guest J. J.]

HM, on that point I agree (though Rob doesn't).

The first three motions, however, are "governed" by the SDC all of which state that these motions are undebatable.

The text on p. 337, l. 5-11, covers the fouth type of motions,"

[Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle]

>>The first three motions, however, are "governed" by the SDC all of which state that these motions are undebatable.<<

I think I may see the "problem".

I was looking at the tinted pages which state that th"

[Guest J. J.]

And p. 337 says, and I'm paraphrasing, when the meeting doesn't have a quorum, use the rules SDC, NOT "follow the rules in the appropriate section." It specifically refers to the SDC.

J. J."

[Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle]

So it's your contention that because p.337 says that the first three motions are governed by their SDC, and because the SDC (p.224) says that the motion to Recess is not debatable (when it's a privileged motion), then even when it's not a privileged motio"

[Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle]

Or how about this:

The motion to Recess has TWO sets of SDC, one when it's a privileged motion and one when it's a main motion. The SDC on pp.223-224 apply only when it's a privileged motion. That's motion #71 in the tinted pages.

But mo"

[Guest J. J.]

Well p. 336 lists the numbered sections and p. 337 says that the motion are "...governed by the Standard Descriptive Characteristics given for them in the numbered sections indicated."

The only SDC in Section 20 says that recess is un"

[Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle]

But if there are two possible interpretations and one (let's call it mine) makes sense and the other (let's call it yours) doesn't, then POI #2 would favor the interpretation that makes sense.

Perhaps RONR could have been a little clearer. But th"

[Guest J. J.]

I'm wondering if it is intentional. The reason that I'm wondering is that, for the fourth type of motions, they clearly are undebatable.

J. J."

[Guest Kim Goldsworthy]

Amazing!

Page 337 is indeed quirky, in that it changes most every default case into an exception.

For example, page 337 says that a Question of Privilege OUTRANKS a motion to Recess, which, as you know, is outright WRONG, under normal circums"

[Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle]

>>making every single thing an exception to the default rules<<

Not so. The first three (of the four permissible motions) are garden-variety main motions.

The only "quirky" exception is the motion to obtain a quorum"