Multiple motions on the table

[Guest Tamara McGowan]

Can you have two motions on the table? We had a situation where a motion was made and seconded. It was a motion that was similar to but expanded a motion that had been adopted a week earlier. Then during discussion, a board member made another motion to "set aside the vote taken (a week earlier) and reopen the question incorporating by reference all discussion that occured" previous to the vote a week earlier. I questioned whether we could have two motions on the table and was told "yes, we can". The vote was taken, the motion approved and then we went back to the first motion. Basically, this member didn't like the motion made a week earlier and wanted it "removed" instead of "expanded" upon.

[George Mervosh]

Your description is fuzzy, but no, it violates a fundamental principle of parliamentary law to have 2 MAIN motions on the table at the same time, however motions to rescind or amend what was adopted are in order......just not 2 of them at the same time.

[Gary Novosielski]

Can you have two motions on the table? We had a situation where a motion was made and seconded. It was a motion that was similar to but expanded a motion that had been adopted a week earlier. Then during discussion, a board member made another motion to "set aside the vote taken (a week earlier) and reopen the question incorporating by reference all discussion that occured" previous to the vote a week earlier. I questioned whether we could have two motions on the table and was told "yes, we can". The vote was taken, the motion approved and then we went back to the first motion. Basically, this member didn't like the motion made a week earlier and wanted it "removed" instead of "expanded" upon.

No. You cannot have two main motions pending at the same time.

Presuming the assembly wished to set aside the first motion briefly because it felt that it first needed to act to rescind the motion of the week before, there is a way to accomplish this properly, and it's one of the rare instances in which the motion to Lay on the Table would be in order. They could agree to:

1. Lay on the Table the first motion under discussion (no debate; majority vote). This clears the way to make the motion to rescind.
2. Rescind the resolution adopted a week earlier (debate allowed; without notice--2/3 vote or a majority if the full membership, with notice--majority vote)
3. Take from the Table the first motion (majority vote), and resume discussing it where you left off, now knowing that the other resolution had been rescinded.

That way there are not two [main] motions pending at one time.

[Tim Wynn]

Can you have two motions on the table?

It's better to say "pending," since the phrase "on the table" has a specific and different meaning in parliamentary procedure.

There are secondary motions that can be made while another motion is pending. The motions you speak of in your post are not secondary motions, and they cannot be made while another motion is pending. See RONR(10th ed.), p. 56, l. 20-25.

We had a situation where a motion was made and seconded. It was a motion that was similar to but expanded a motion that had been adopted a week earlier.

It's not clear if this motion would be in order.

Then during discussion, a board member made another motion to "set aside the vote taken (a week earlier) and reopen the question

This describes the motion to Reconsider, but that motion has time restrictions which would probably prevent it from being moved in this case. So this action would require a motion to Rescind or Amend Something Previously Adopted. See RONR(10th ed.), section 35.

incorporating by reference all discussion that occured" previous to the vote a week earlier.

This part makes no sense.

[Gary Novosielski]

This part makes no sense.

Yes, that whole "discussion incorporated by reference" is complete nonsense. It sounds like somebody is trying to say something in lawyer-ese, but in a parliamentary setting this is meaningless chin-music.

Motions do not "incorporate" discussion by reference, or by inclusion, or any other way. They contain only what the assembly proposes to do. And since the idea was to rescind what happened the week before, it makes little difference what the discussion at the time might have been. People either remembered it, or they didn't.