RE: [council] Alternate RAA motion

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 12:58 -0800, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
> It is not proper for you to introduce
> this as amendments to my motion.

I do believe that it is a valid action to submit amendments to a motion.
If those amendments are not accepted as friendly, then that amendment
would need to be voted on before the motion itself.  We have had
occasions, though not many, in the past where we followed this
procedure.  And while we do not follow formal rules of order  (e.g.
Roberts) in that we allow any friendly amendments at all, we do follow
with respect to voting on amendments before motions and requiring a
majority vote to pass an amendment.

In this amendment, though, I am not quite clear on how it transforms the
original amendment,  It would seem that one needs to say things like:

- Add after the nth whereas the following ...

- add after the mth resolved the following ...

- add the following words after xxyyzz in paragrpaph 3: word word word.

in order to have a well formed amendment we could vote on.

Finally, with regard to bringing something up for a vote again, we have
no rules against doing so that I know of.  Obviously, it does not make
sense to do so unless one thinks they will have a changed outcome.  I do
not know if people have a reason to believe there will be a changed
outcome and reach a 2/3 vote, but I can only assume they think so.

a.