Guest dewitt holland Posted October 25, 2010 at 01:23 AM Report Share Posted October 25, 2010 at 01:23 AM JUST HAD A CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH CONFERENCE TODAY AND THERE WAS A MOTION, IT WAS SECONDED AND IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE SECOND WAS CALLED OUT---SOMEONE CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. DISCUSSION WAS OMMITED BECAUSE THERE WAS NO TIME TO ASK FOR DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE TIME THE MOTION WAS SECONDED AND THE QUESTION WAS CALLED. PEOPLE TRIED TO CALL FOR DISCUSSION BUT IT WAS PROTESTED BY SOME MEMBERS THAT DISCUSSION WAS NOT ALLOWED SINCE THE QUESTION WAS CALLED FIRST. THE VOTE WAS THEN TAKEN. IS THIS PROPER PROCEDURE AND COULD THIS NULLIFY THE VOTING OUTCOME SINCE DISCUSSION WAS NOT HELD??ANY HELP WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted October 25, 2010 at 01:27 AM Report Share Posted October 25, 2010 at 01:27 AM IS THIS PROPER PROCEDURE AND COULD THIS NULLIFY THE VOTING OUTCOME SINCE DISCUSSION WAS NOT HELD??No. And no.See FAQ #11, "Must debate on a motion stop immediately as soon as any member calls the question?".And please don't type in ALL CAPS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 25, 2010 at 01:30 AM Report Share Posted October 25, 2010 at 01:30 AM Hollering out "Calling the question" is not sufficient to stop debate. "Calling ..." is a motion (to stop debate and vote immediately) and must be adopted by a 2/3 vote to accomplish its ends. The formal name of the motion is "previous question" -- see RONR, p. 189 ff.But that is water under the bridge (or over the dam) now -- the time to correct the procedural error was when the error happened. Too late now. The motion stands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dewitt holland Posted October 25, 2010 at 01:50 AM Report Share Posted October 25, 2010 at 01:50 AM Hollering out "Calling the question" is not sufficient to stop debate. "Calling ..." is a motion (to stop debate and vote immediately) and must be adopted by a 2/3 vote to accomplish its ends. The formal name of the motion is "previous question" -- see RONR, p. 189 ff.But that is water under the bridge (or over the dam) now -- the time to correct the procedural error was when the error happened. Too late now. The motion stands.Could I at the next meeting make a motion to reinstate the item that was voted down? Then have proper discussion and maybe it would pass the next time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted October 25, 2010 at 02:00 AM Report Share Posted October 25, 2010 at 02:00 AM Could I at the next meeting make a motion to reinstate the item that was voted down? Then have proper discussion and maybe it would pass the next time?There's no need for "a motion to reinstate." Just make the same motion again at the next meeting, and then have proper discussion and maybe it will pass this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.