Disregard for motion made and carried

[kloepper63]

If a motion is made, seconded, voted on and carried, can the board choose to ignore the motion and do what they want, despite what membership voted NOT to do?

[hmtcastle]

If a motion is made, seconded, voted on and carried, can the board choose to ignore the motion and do what they want, despite what membership voted NOT to do?

No.

Though, generally speaking, a motion not to do something is often out of order. But that's another story.

[kloepper63]

"I move to table any move to create xyz until all avenues of discussion amd mediation with abc have been thouroughly exhausted for one year, or until a postive outcome has been achieved."

Does this motion mean DO NOTHING FOR ONE YEAR?

[Chris Harrison]

"I move to table any move to create xyz until all avenues of discussion amd mediation with abc have been thouroughly exhausted for one year, or until a postive outcome has been achieved."

Does this motion mean DO NOTHING FOR ONE YEAR?

I don't think that is the type of motion that Mr. Mountcastle was speaking of (though I could be wrong-wouldn't be the first time). Since such a motion would tie the hands of future sessions and at the least would require adopting a Special Rule of Order (which would require previous notice and a 2/3 vote or a majority of the ENTIRE Membership if notice wasn't given).

[Tim Wynn]

"I move to table any move to create xyz until all avenues of discussion amd mediation with abc have been thouroughly exhausted for one year, or until a postive outcome has been achieved."

Does this motion mean DO NOTHING FOR ONE YEAR?

This motion is meaningless and out of order.

[Gary Novosielski]

"I move to table any move to create xyz until all avenues of discussion amd mediation with abc have been thouroughly exhausted for one year, or until a postive outcome has been achieved."

Does this motion mean DO NOTHING FOR ONE YEAR?

That motion will be ruled out of order. You can't move NOT to do something. If the assembly wishes not to create xyz it will simply never vote to create xyz.

A motion not to do something is meaningless, because if it's adopted, you do nothing, but if it's defeated, you still do nothing.

Also, you can't table something that has not even been moved yet, and you can't table something for more than one session.

[Dan Honemann]

"I move to table any move to create xyz until all avenues of discussion amd mediation with abc have been thouroughly exhausted for one year, or until a postive outcome has been achieved."

Does this motion mean DO NOTHING FOR ONE YEAR?

It means whatever it means, and since it was adopted, the board may not do anything that conflicts with it.

[Chris Harrison]

That motion will be ruled out of order. You can't move NOT to do something. If the assembly wishes not to create xyz it will simply never vote to create xyz.

A motion not to do something is meaningless, because if it's adopted, you do nothing, but if it's defeated, you still do nothing.

It sounds like they are wanting to prohibit the introduction of a motion regarding creating xyz for a year past all avenues of discussion and mediation with abc having been thoroughly exhausted, or until a positive outcome has been achieved. I don't see why that wouldn't be proper (after the wording is fixed so it would be in order).

[Tim Wynn]

It means whatever it means, and since it was adopted, the board may not do anything that conflicts with it.

The board will have its work cut out for it, trying to figure out a way to conflict with a motion to Lay a nonexistent motion on the Table.

Okay, okay, I get it. This is being too technical. Obviously, the assembly intended to do something, if it adopted this motion... and perhaps that something was to block the board from taking action on a specific topic.

[Josh Martin]

Obviously, the assembly intended to do something, if it adopted this motion... and perhaps that something was to block the board from taking action on a specific topic.

I agree. I suspect the intent of the motion was indeed to prevent the board from taking action, which is perfectly proper. The motion was rather sloppily worded, but that's beside the point.

[kloepper63]

I agree. I suspect the intent of the motion was indeed to prevent the board from taking action, which is perfectly proper. The motion was rather sloppily worded, but that's beside the point.

You are correct. The board wanted to do something and MANY people were against it. The members present at the meeting requested tabling the board "doing something" until all other possible options had been exhausted. The problem now is the board was tired of wating and proceeded anyway....what recourse do members have?

Just out of curiousity, what would have been the correct way to word it?

[Tim Wynn]

You are correct. The board wanted to do something and MANY people were against it. The members present at the meeting requested tabling the board "doing something" until all other possible options had been exhausted. The problem now is the board was tired of wating and proceeded anyway....what recourse do members have?

Just out of curiousity, what would have been the correct way to word it?

See RONR(10th ed.), p. 466, l. 7-14.

You could give the board an order, with a motion such as, "That the board be instructed to refrain from taking any action on BLANKITY BLANK."

[kloepper63]

See RONR(10th ed.), p. 466, l. 7-14.

You could give the board an order, with a motion such as, "That the board be instructed to refrain from taking any action on BLANKITY BLANK."

How do you do that when there will not be another meeting until April and they are already in the process of doing what they were told NOT to do? This board only meets two times per year and they just had their fall meeting last weekend. The annual members meeting will not be until spring.

[Chris Harrison]

The problem now is the board was tired of wating and proceeded anyway....what recourse do members have?

First, let the appropriate people know that the Board DOES NOT have the authority to take any actions on that particular issue and that the Membership adopted a motion specifically telling the Board hands off (supply a copy of the minutes where this motion was adopted as proof if needed). Next, see FAQ #20 on how to discipline the Board members if desired.

Just out of curiousity, what would have been the correct way to word it?

That is up to you all. It just could have used some wordsmithing to make it more clear and concise.

[Chris Harrison]

How do you do that when there will not be another meeting until April and they are already in the process of doing what they were told NOT to do? This board only meets two times per year and they just had their fall meeting last weekend. The annual members meeting will not be until spring.

Call a Special Meeting of the Membership (if the bylaws provide for it) and if the Board has already taken the actions do what I suggested above and then Rescind whatever actions they have taken (just to cover your bases). You already have a motion adopted telling the Board hands off so they should not be doing anything but when you are in the Special Meeting you can use Amend Something Previously Adopted (RONR pp. 293-299) to wordsmith the motion to make it more clear and concise.

If Special Meetings aren't provided for in the bylaws you don't have many parliamentary options under RONR. But you can still notify the appropriate people that the Board doesn't have the authority and hopefully the ball can be rolled back up the hill. If not, you may have to look to other non-parliamentary options to deal with this or you can just leave it alone and deal with the Board in the spring.

[hmtcastle]

It just could have used some wordsmithing to make it more clear and concise.

And you could have started by not (incorrectly) using the word "table". It may sound more "parliamentary" but it's usually best to simply state what you want, in plain jargon-free English.

[Gary Novosielski]

It means whatever it means, and since it was adopted, the board may not do anything that conflicts with it.

Oooo. I missed that little detail. There's a lot of truth in what actually happens.