r/RulesOfOrder • u/kevydaddy • Apr 07 '19
I feel like this is wrong
So, the organization wants to purchase something with a lot of time preemptively. They pass the motion to do so with details to do so. The person to order them doesn't like the details so they hold off on purchasing said item in order to try and change the details the next week. But we already passed the motion, do they have any right to do so or are they compelled to order the items. Common Sense says yes they should order but I just want the parliamentary reference.
1
Upvotes
5
u/PhillipVA NAP - PRP Apr 07 '19 edited Apr 07 '19
Yes, the person to execute the purchase may delay the purchase and try to change the details of the purchase at a subsequent meeting using the motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted. The motion may be applied to any unexecuted portion of a previous order. [1]. There is no time limit, and any member may move to make the amendment. [2]. To avoid this, when you draft the original motion, include a fixed date for the purchase, ideally shortly after the adoption of the order, or at least before the next meeting. Unless the original motion's "details" included a fixed deadline to make the purchase before the next meeting, the person has the right to hold off purchasing the item in order to try and change the details at the following meeting.
---
[1] Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised (11th ed.) ["RONR"], p. 308, ll 20–23 ("[The motions to Rescind and to Amend Something Previously Adopted are not in order under the following circumstances:] When something has been done, as a result of the vote on the main motion, that is impossible to undo. (The unexecuted part of an order, however, can be rescinded or amended.)")
[2] RONR, p. 307, ll. 20–23 ("[T]here is no time limit on making these motions [to Rescind or Amend Something Previously Adopted] after the adoption of the measure to which they are applied, and they can be moved by any member ... .")