Revision to Standing Rules: Motions, Facilitation Review

Showing 6 reactions

How would you tag this suggestion?
Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Charlene Dicalogero
    commented 2018-01-15 19:58:06 -0500
    John and Danny—this seems a bit complicated for members to understand and for facilitators to carry out.

    In Section A, there appear to be 8 tests (9 with straw poll) the two facilitators have to go through to permit a motion. As a facilitator, it would help me and I think StateCom to get business done, to have Section A, 3rd paragraph guidance include all 3 criteria as the initial test to permit a motion from the floor: i.e., if motion is germane to the agenda item, AND will help StateCom dispose of business before it, AND it addresses a time-critical need…. "

    Section A, 1st paragraph: I’d also suggest dropping “at least”. We’re allowing motions—not necessarily encouraging every StateCom member to make one at every meeting. :-) By the same token, I’m not sure how allowing a member (or every member?) to make an alternative motion helps us deal with the initial motion in an efficient and reasonable way. I’d suggest keeping the process to a) facilitators or parliamentarian asking the initial motioner to withdraw the motion if they believe it does not meet all 3 admitting criteria and/or meets any of the 6 blocking criteria, b) friendly amendments, and c) to consense the motion up or down. (And BTW, I’d suggest replacing “voting” with “condensing” in 2nd to last para, Section A.)

    Section B: question: is the total # of sponsors of the facilitation review 3 or 3 plus the initial motioner for review, = 4? (and this type of motion is really a “point of order,” not a motion that has to go through Section A, right??).
  • Brian Cady
    commented 2018-01-15 16:04:44 -0500

    A. The text below shall be added to the Standing Rules of State Committee

    Motions from the Floor

    Any member may offer a motion from the floor at least once in each meeting or more than once with permission of the facilitators. The motion must be clearly stated and must be put in writing if the facilitators so request. If any member wishes to suggest an alternative motion, then that member will be allowed to offer their motion before the vote on the initial motion.

    The meeting facilitators will then rule whether to admit or block the motion (or motions) before them. In making this decision, the facilitators should consult with the parliamentarian as appropriate. If a motion is blocked then no further discussion about it is required

    In general, a motion should be admitted if it is germane to the agenda item under discussion, if it allows StateCom to dispose of the business before it, or if it addresses a time critical need for which injury will be done to the Party if no action is taken at this meeting.

    In general a motion should be blocked if it alters or conflicts with the GRP Bylaws or the Standing Rules of State Committee, if it is not germane to the agenda item being addressed, or if it is sufficiently complicated or controversial that it deserves full vetting and due notice using the standard proposal procedures.

    In addition, facilitators may block a motion if they feel it is clearly unable to receive enough support to be adopted, or that admitting it would prevent StateCom from having the time to address more relevant or important business. In blocking on these grounds, facilitators are encouraged to conduct a straw poll of StateCom to verify that StateCom supports their decision.

    Once admitted, the floor may be opened for the purpose of accepting friendly amendments to the motion. The time allotted for this is at the discretion of the facilitators who will determine if time devoted to amendment of the motion is productive or necessary.

    Once the period of amendment is over, the discussion of the motion and voting upon it shall continue using the standard standing rules.

    Nothing in this section shall be construed as altering the right to raise a point of order.

    - – - – -

    B. The following text shall be added to the Standing Rules of State Committee:

    Facilitation Review

    Any StateCom member may raise, as a point of order, a facilitation review motion that would reverse or set aside a specific decision of the facilitators providing that such member has not previously at the same meeting made such a motion. The motion must be clearly stated and must then receive sponsorship of at least three StateCom members. The proposer shall be given one minute to explain the motion. The facilitators shall then be given one minute to explain the reasoning behind their decision. A vote is then taken on the motion and it is adopted if it receives two-thirds majority approval. If, at any point during this process, the facilitators accept the motion, it shall be deemed to have been adopted. Once adopted, the facilitators shall honor the decision.


    If adopted, the text shall be added in an appropriate location in the Standing Rules of State Committee.


    There are no financial implications of this proposal.


    Reference 1: Standing Rules of State Committee
  • Brian Cady
    commented 2018-01-15 16:03:58 -0500
    TITLE: Revision to Standing Rules: Motions, Facilitation Review

    SPONSORS: John Andrews, Danny Factor

    VETTING COMMITTEES: None (sent to all committees)

    FLOOR MANAGER: John Andrews, [email protected], Tel. 781-382-5658

    SHEPHERD: John Andrews

    SUMMARY: This proposal clarifies the handling of motions from the floor and specifies how a decision of the facilitators may be reviewed.


    Introduction of motions from the floor is a standard parliamentary practice that has been traditionally used by State Committee, and the practice of hearing motions from the floor is neither prohibited by our bylaws or our State Committee standing rules. However, according to our standing rules, motions cannot be used to introduce proposals that have not undergone required vetting and provided required prior notification. Currently there is a lack of clarity regarding exactly which types of motions from the floor are admissible and which require submission of a formal proposal. Part A of this proposal clarifies how motions are to be assessed and provides guidance to facilitators by further limiting the instances in which motions from the floor may be introduced. Part B specifies the procedures for asking StateCom to review a decision of the facilitators. Part B provides a check on the many powers give to facilitators, thus ensuring that their decisions are not contrary to the will of StateCom. The sponsors request that StateCom vote separately on each section of this proposal.

    If this proposal passes (YES vote), the facilitators will be instructed to impose specific limitations on the introduction of motions from the floor. If this proposal fails (NO vote) then motions from the floor will continue to be allowed but without specific guidelines on which to accept.
  • Brian Cady
    commented 2018-01-15 15:55:57 -0500
    test 2
  • Brian Cady
    commented 2018-01-15 15:49:48 -0500
  • Brian Cady
    published this page in 2018_Winter_Statecom_Meeting_Proposals 2018-01-15 15:30:47 -0500