Guest Rose Posted September 20, 2010 at 08:45 PM Report Share Posted September 20, 2010 at 08:45 PM If an item appears on an agenda of a public meeting, but after consensus due to lack of full board, the item isn't called for a motion or second, is a motion and second to table the item to the next meeting required? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted September 20, 2010 at 09:02 PM Report Share Posted September 20, 2010 at 09:02 PM Under the rules in RONR? No, it's not necessary, nor would it be in order. (you're mis-using the motion to table but we can take that up at another time) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rose Posted September 20, 2010 at 09:36 PM Report Share Posted September 20, 2010 at 09:36 PM Under the rules in RONR? No, it's not necessary, nor would it be in order. (you're mis-using the motion to table but we can take that up at another time)I used 'motion to table' because that is what our legal counsel advised them and what they did. Would you clarify your remark for me when you have time George? Many thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted September 20, 2010 at 10:08 PM Report Share Posted September 20, 2010 at 10:08 PM I used 'motion to table' because that is what our legal counsel advised them and what they did. Would you clarify your remark for me when you have time George? Many thanks.I am not George, rumors to the contrary notwithstanding , you might want to take a look at FAQ #12 at the Robert's Rules of Order website, www.robertsrules.com. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted September 20, 2010 at 11:50 PM Report Share Posted September 20, 2010 at 11:50 PM I used 'motion to table' because that is what our legal counsel advised them and what they did. Would you clarify your remark for me when you have time George? Many thanks.I not George, rumors to the contrary notwithstanding , you might want to take a look at FAQ #12 at the Robert's Rules of Order website, www.robertsrules.com.Rob Elsman answers for me better than I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted September 21, 2010 at 03:22 AM Report Share Posted September 21, 2010 at 03:22 AM I used 'motion to table' because that is what our legal counsel advised them and what they did. Would you clarify your remark for me when you have time George? Many thanks.In my experience, lawyers as a group are no better educated in parliamentary procedure than are plumbers. But my plumber charges more than most lawyers, so maybe there is a balance there somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted September 21, 2010 at 12:45 PM Report Share Posted September 21, 2010 at 12:45 PM In my experience, lawyers as a group are no better educated in parliamentary procedure than are plumbers. Nor is there any reason that they should be, other than in those instances in which procedural rules are prescribed by applicable statutes (which, unfortunately, is happening more and more often these days). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rose Posted September 21, 2010 at 12:58 PM Report Share Posted September 21, 2010 at 12:58 PM In my experience, lawyers as a group are no better educated in parliamentary procedure than are plumbers. But my plumber charges more than most lawyers, so maybe there is a balance there somewhere.Having been a paralegal for over 15 years and worked for more than a few attorneys, I'd have to say I somewhat agree except with the fees charged. I did note FAQ #12, and went to the Rules cite.Thanks everyone for your help!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.