|
PARLIAMENTARIAN - CHRIS HERZOG
Resolution vs. Motion
Resolutions are a long-standing and useful way for assemblies to present more complex proposals in written form. Many organizations rely on them for statements of philosophy or public policy (like GFWC/CFWC), while routine action items are handled as “new business”. Any distinction exists because of bylaw rules or past practice, not because of parliamentary procedure. Most organizations handle most matters through straightforward motions and reserve resolutions for special purposes, or ceremony. (RONR 12 Ed. 4:5)
If your bylaws call for a “Resolutions Committee” to be formed (CFWC Article XV Section 15.1), then it shall be formed by a specified number of members to review and discuss such resolutions submitted to determine if it is worthy of time and discussion by the assembly. Most times a committee review will help to make it clear to members, shortening the process for debate and adoption.
Because a resolution is simply a main motion, the same parliamentary rules apply to both. They can be debated, amended, referred to a committee, postponed, or adopted just like any other motion.
Many people are surprised to learn that the word “resolution” has no specific meaning in parliamentary procedure. At its core, a resolution and a main motion are the same thing. Both are proposals for the assembly to take action.
A typical motion might be introduced verbally: “I move that the organization support disaster relief funding.” A resolution states the same idea but in a more formal written structure, often beginning with language such as: “It is Resolved, that the organization support disaster relief funding.”
In short, whether resolutions are used for specific topics or for all business depends on the organization. From a parliamentary standpoint, however, a resolution is simply a main motion presented in greater formality with a “Resolved that” clause and some “Whereas” clauses for explanation.
|