Motion declared passed in error

[Guest Linda Waldemar]

Our organization has 53 members, 24 were present at the meeting. A motion was made to rescind a motion from the previous meeting. RONR (~35, page 298, line 29) states that "Without previous notice, the motion requires a two-thirds vote or a majority of the entire membership for its adoption."

Motion: Move to repeat action of April 3rd to do nothing regarding Denise Bolds letter of March 29th.

Vote: 8 in favor, 6 opposed. Two-thirds vote is 9.34 or 10. The Chairman declared that the motion passed.

Motion: Move for IAO to send a letter to Denise Bolds acknowledging receipt of her letter of March 29th.

Vote: 7 in favor 6 opposed. Two-thirds vote is 8.67 or 9. The Chairman declared that the motion passed.

I am Parliamentarian of the organization, but was absent from the meeting. A member was concerned that the action taken was not legal and asked me. It appears that both motions failed but were erroneously declared as passed by the chair. What should be done at this point to correct the situation.

Thank you for your consideration of this question.

[Chris Harrison]

Motion: Move to repeat action of April 3rd to do nothing regarding Denise Bolds letter of March 29th.

Is that to "repeat" or "repeal"?

[Mr. J!]

It appears that both motions failed but were erroneously declared as passed by the chair.

What should be done at this point....

If no timely point of order was made, the declaration of the chair stands.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

In general:

If you had adopted a motion "... to do nothing about X ...", and then you rescind this action (which was an improper motion to move to begin with, but you aren't asking about this half of your problem, so I will let it slide), then you are free to "do something," and the requirement of a two-thirds vote or the requirement for previous notice goes away, and you can "do something" by majority vote, because the new motion has nothing to conflict with - i.e., the old "do nothing" policy was rescinded, and no longer imposes a burden on the assembly, upon rescission.

To repeat the previous poster:

Did you mean "repeal" when you typed "repeat"?

[Guest Linda Waldemar]

Copied motion from minutes but I think that "repeat" should be "repeal".

>If you had adopted a motion "... to do nothing about X ...", and then you rescind this action (which was an improper motion to move to begin with

Don't understand. Does not the motion to rescind without prior notice need 2/3 vote? What is improper about the motion.

[Trina]

...What is improper about the motion.

I believe the point was that the original motion -- to do nothing -- was improper. It is not proper (or sensible) to make a motion to maintain the status quo.

'A motion whose only effect is to propose that the assembly refrain from doing something should not be offered if the same result can be accomplished by adopting no motion at all.' (RONR pp. 99-100)

[LeeM]

Don't understand. Does not the motion to rescind without prior notice need 2/3 vote?

You are correct that, usually, Rescind requires a 2/3 vote (or a vote of a majority of the entire membership) if previous notice had not been given.

The rule concerning the vote needed to Rescind something is a rule of order, and as a result, a Point of Order must be timely (that is, the objection must be made at the time the infraction is happening).

Please see RONR Official Interpretation 2006-18 for additional details.

[Rob Elsman]

If no timely point of order was made, the declaration of the chair stands.

This is the salient point, I think. See RONR, Off. Interp. 2006-18, www.robertsrules.com.

[Guest Linda Waldemar]

Thank you, all.