Legal motion?

[Guest member]

I'm wondering if this is even a legal motion to make:

Vote on all rules made before our term

xxxx motioned that any rules passed prior to sitting of current board will not stand

xxxx seconded

Motion Passed (unanimous)

I understand a current board has a right to vote to overturn rules implemented by previous boards. I am just wondering if the wording of a motion that is so generic is even legal. Questions have been asked by many members on what "rules" specifically were being overturned, and no direct answer has ever been given other than to say that of course the by-laws would not change as that would require membership vote.

The board stated the following in response to questions:

We just followed the correct proceedure to change any "rules" that are outdated or were never put into effect accurately.

Wouldn't the rules that are being overturned need to be spelled out?

[Robert B Fish]

The problem with such an omnibus motion is that if fails to recognize that some motions cannot be rescinded, even by unanimous vote. Some examples are motions to amend the bylaws, elections, and motions that have already been completed (you can't 'unbuy' of 'unpaint' something).

Probably the better option is to assemble a list of motions previously passed by the organization that are still in effect and rescinding the ones you wish to rescind.

I would take that actual effect of this motion to be that all previous motions that can be rescinded have been rescinded.

-Bob

[Thomas Ralph]

I agree with Mr. Fish and would add the rather less important fact that seconders are not named in the minutes.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

I am just wondering if the wording of a motion that is so generic is even legal.

Questions have been asked by many members on what "rules" specifically were being overturned, and no direct answer has ever been given other than to say that of course the bylaws would not change as that would require membership vote.

The board stated the following in response to questions:

We just followed the correct procedure to change any "rules" that are outdated or were never put into effect accurately.

Wouldn't the rules that are being overturned need to be spelled out?

Yes and no.

• Yes, the rules in question to be erased forever should be easily identifiable.

• No, the fact that an omnibus kind of motion just refers to everything before Deadline X, is allowable.

Unclear, fuzzy, ambiguous main motions are not necessary out of order.

Just because a main motion can be interpreted in a myriad of ways, that fact, by itself, does not make the motion illegal. (Only impossible to obey meaningfully or to obey consistently.)