Guest paul Posted January 18, 2019 at 05:12 PM Report Share Posted January 18, 2019 at 05:12 PM Member introduce motion to postpone vote on document. Motion not seconded. Minutes show motion and "lost due to absence of second". How should minutes reflect a motion not seconded. It was not lost or past as there was not debate nor vote. Pages that reflect the proper handling would be helpful. Thanks in advance, Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 18, 2019 at 05:21 PM Report Share Posted January 18, 2019 at 05:21 PM 7 minutes ago, Guest paul said: Member introduce motion to postpone vote on document. Motion not seconded. Minutes show motion and "lost due to absence of second". How should minutes reflect a motion not seconded. It was not lost or past as there was not debate nor vote. Pages that reflect the proper handling would be helpful. Thanks in advance, Paul If this motion was a main motion, the minutes should reflect that it died for lack of a second. If it was a subsidiary motion to postpone a pending main motion, it shouldn't be reported at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Zev Posted January 18, 2019 at 09:21 PM Report Share Posted January 18, 2019 at 09:21 PM See pages 35-37 of RONR 11th edition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted January 19, 2019 at 08:06 PM Report Share Posted January 19, 2019 at 08:06 PM And see pages 469-470 for which motions should be included in the minutes. I believe # 7 at the top of page 470 is what you are looking for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest paul Posted January 20, 2019 at 10:10 PM Report Share Posted January 20, 2019 at 10:10 PM On 1/19/2019 at 3:06 PM, Richard Brown said: And see pages 469-470 for which motions should be included in the minutes. I believe # 7 at the top of page 470 is what you are looking for. Thank you for the reference. The problem is the minutes state that motion was "lost" due to no second. It was not lost but not discussed due to no second. Looking to correct the description. It may be that the motion should not have been recorded in the minutes because it was not seconded. It may also be that no second is required as this is a Board of less than 12 members, but that may be a different topic. Any suggested wording in RONR? Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted January 20, 2019 at 10:36 PM Report Share Posted January 20, 2019 at 10:36 PM (edited) 26 minutes ago, Guest paul said: Thank you for the reference. The problem is the minutes state that motion was "lost" due to no second. It was not lost but not discussed due to no second. Looking to correct the description. It may be that the motion should not have been recorded in the minutes because it was not seconded. It may also be that no second is required as this is a Board of less than 12 members, but that may be a different topic. Any suggested wording in RONR? Paul Since the motion failed due to lack of a second, it should not be in the minutes at all. But, if you are going to leave it in the minutes anyway, I would say that "The motion failed (or died) due to lack of a second". But, again, it should not be in the minutes at all. Even though this is a board of less than 12 members, does it follow the small board rules? And are motions normally seconded? Even if the board utilizes the small board rules and the chair was in error by declaring that the motion failed for lack of a second, his erroneous ruling would have required a timely point of order to correct it. If no one raised a timely point of order, then his ruling stands and the motion failed due to lack of a second. Edited January 20, 2019 at 10:37 PM by Richard Brown Added the "or died" option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted January 21, 2019 at 12:10 AM Report Share Posted January 21, 2019 at 12:10 AM (edited) 1 hour ago, Richard Brown said: Since the motion failed due to lack of a second, it should not be in the minutes at all. But, if you are going to leave it in the minutes anyway, I would say that "The motion failed (or died) due to lack of a second". But, again, it should not be in the minutes at all. But RONR provides that the minutes: Quote ...should show: 6) all main motions (10) or motions to bring a main question again before the assembly (pp. 74–79; 34–37) that were made or taken up—except, normally , any that were withdrawn—.... <emphasis added> 2 A main motion that was made and then died for lack of a second should, therefore, be included in the minutes, along with its disposition. Edited January 21, 2019 at 12:15 AM by Gary Novosielski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted January 21, 2019 at 12:16 AM Report Share Posted January 21, 2019 at 12:16 AM 1 minute ago, Gary Novosielski said: But RONR provides that the minutes: A main motion that was made and then died for lack of a second should, therefore, be included in the minutes, along with its disposition. The motion that failed to receive a second was the motion to postpone, which is not a main motion. It is a subsidiary motion, not a main motion. It does not go in the minutes if it failed to receive a second. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted January 21, 2019 at 12:18 AM Report Share Posted January 21, 2019 at 12:18 AM Ah, right you are. That rule does not apply to subsidiary motions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted January 21, 2019 at 12:23 AM Report Share Posted January 21, 2019 at 12:23 AM I will note, for what it's worth, that Guest Paul is not as clear as he could be that it was the motion to postpone which failed to receive a second and not the original main motion. I interpret his post to mean that the motion to postpone failed to receive a second. If it was the main motion that failed to receive a second, then I agree that it should be in the minutes if it failed due to lack of a second. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 21, 2019 at 11:33 AM Report Share Posted January 21, 2019 at 11:33 AM 10 hours ago, Richard Brown said: I will note, for what it's worth, that Guest Paul is not as clear as he could be that it was the motion to postpone which failed to receive a second and not the original main motion. I interpret his post to mean that the motion to postpone failed to receive a second. If it was the main motion that failed to receive a second, then I agree that it should be in the minutes if it failed due to lack of a second. This is the reason why my response was written as it was. The motion that died for lack of a second may have been an incidental main motion to postpone something, or it may have been a subsidiary motion to postpone, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest paul Posted January 21, 2019 at 07:01 PM Report Share Posted January 21, 2019 at 07:01 PM 7 hours ago, Daniel H. Honemann said: This is the reason why my response was written as it was. The motion that died for lack of a second may have been an incidental main motion to postpone something, or it may have been a subsidiary motion to postpone, 7 hours ago, Daniel H. Honemann said: This is the reason why my response was written as it was. The motion that died for lack of a second may have been an incidental main motion to postpone something, or it may have been a subsidiary motion to postpone, 7 hours ago, Daniel H. Honemann said: This is the reason why my response was written as it was. The motion that died for lack of a second may have been an incidental main motion to postpone something, or it may have been a subsidiary motion to postpone, 20 hours ago, Richard Brown said: Since the motion failed due to lack of a second, it should not be in the minutes at all. But, if you are going to leave it in the minutes anyway, I would say that "The motion failed (or died) due to lack of a second". But, again, it should not be in the minutes at all. Even though this is a board of less than 12 members, does it follow the small board rules? And are motions normally seconded? Even if the board utilizes the small board rules and the chair was in error by declaring that the motion failed for lack of a second, his erroneous ruling would have required a timely point of order to correct it. If no one raised a timely point of order, then his ruling stands and the motion failed due to lack of a second. On 1/19/2019 at 3:06 PM, Richard Brown said: And see pages 469-470 for which motions should be included in the minutes. I believe # 7 at the top of page 470 is what you are looking for. Thank you for the reference. The problem is the minutes state that motion was "lost" due to no second. It was not lost but not discussed due to no second. Looking to correct the description. It may be that the motion should not have been recorded in the minutes because it was not seconded. It may also be that no second is required as this is a Board of less than 12 members, but that may be a different topic. Any suggested wording in RONR? Paul Thanks everyone. That was all round educational, as usual. I am going to suggest that "failed" replace the word "lost" due to absence of a second. Regards to all, Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted January 21, 2019 at 07:40 PM Report Share Posted January 21, 2019 at 07:40 PM Paul, if you are determined to leave the fact that the motion failed or died for lack of a second in the minutes, I gave you the suggested wording in a post above which you just quoted from. However, if you are going to amend that statement anyway just to change the language, why not just delete that reference to it failing altogether? RONR says it should not be in the minutes. It's your call. We have told you what the rule is. But, by majority vote, your assembly can put pretty much whatever it wants to in the minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted January 21, 2019 at 08:40 PM Report Share Posted January 21, 2019 at 08:40 PM 1 hour ago, Guest paul said: Thank you for the reference. The problem is the minutes state that motion was "lost" due to no second. It was not lost but not discussed due to no second. Looking to correct the description. It may be that the motion should not have been recorded in the minutes because it was not seconded. It may also be that no second is required as this is a Board of less than 12 members, but that may be a different topic. Any suggested wording in RONR? Paul Thanks everyone. That was all round educational, as usual. I am going to suggest that "failed" replace the word "lost" due to absence of a second. Regards to all, Paul 2 It has been pointed out several times already that the correct phrase is "died for lack of a second". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts