2nd Motion

[Guest Christine]

Hello, Thanks for answering. I made a motion to present a proposal to amend  my school districts Constitution, my motion was diverted by the chair to answer a question from the audience. He then asked me to present. I was nervous and forgot to ask for a 2nd motion. I believe the chair did it on purpose b/c  before  the other members  presentation he asked for the 2nd motion, but not mine. After I presented for 30 minutes and there were question and no one objected to my presentation, there was nothing to vote on and it was just to give info to vote on the info presented at a later time. Now I am hearing rumbling that my presentation does not count b/c there wasn't  2nd motion and now it can't be voted on at a later date. My proposal goes against the chairs ideas and his committee. Can anyone help me to understand if the 2nd motion is really needed in my situation. Thanks anyone who can help... Christine 

[Gary Novosielski]

The lack of a second doesn't invalidate anything, unless some objection was raised immediately.  If the chair and the membership proceeded to consider your proposal, the lack of a second is moot. The purpose of a second is to show that more than one person wished to consider the matter.  The fact that they did go ahead and consider it proves that someone wanted to, so they did effectively second it.

However, you also say that your presentation was not a motion, and a motion would be made at a later time.  If that's the case, there is no need for a second at all.  The presentation was allowed, and took place.  There's no way that does not count.  It happened in real life.

[Alicia Percell, PRP]

On 11/25/2022 at 3:04 PM, Guest Christine said:

Now I am hearing rumbling that my presentation does not count b/c there wasn't  2nd motion and now it can't be voted on at a later date.

Just because of the way you wrote the sentence above, do your bylaws have some sort of requirement that a presentation must be made on the idea at a prior meeting before it can be voted on at a later meeting?  It would be an unusual rule, but there could be one.  I just wonder why some think it would make a difference to claim that your presentation "doesn't count"...whatever that means.  You factually did make a presentation, so...

It's not even YOUR responsibility as the presenter to ask for a second.  That's the chair's responsibility to do, if one is needed.

Unless there's more to the story, (like Mr. Novosielski above) I don't know why there was a need for a motion (and usually a second) anyway.  You said there was nothing for them to vote on.

Regardless of whether there is a rule requiring the idea to be presented at a prior meeting, and even if it was required under the circumstances to have a motion of some sort which would be seconded, the lack of a second at the time does not after-the-fact invalidate what happened.  A second is much less critical to the process than some seem to think, and to add a citation that you can share with those now claiming that it doesn't count...

RONR (12th ed.) 4:9 - 4:14 covers what a second is and how it works.  Pay particular attention to 4:12, which says:

"The requirement of a second is for the chair’s guidance whether to state the question on the motion, thus placing it before the assembly. Its purpose is to prevent time from being consumed by the assembly’s having to dispose of a motion that only one person wants to see introduced."

It's to determine whether there's even a modicum of support for the motion.  Once you've gotten past that point, and the chair recognized you, and you spent 30 minutes making the presentation, it's pretty irrelevant whether or not the assembly should spend the time to listen to your presentation because they already did factually listen to your presentation.

And if a motion/second were required, see 4:13, which in part says:

"After debate has begun or, if there is no debate, after any member has voted, the lack of a second has become immaterial and it is too late to make a point of order that the motion has not been seconded. If a motion is considered and adopted without having been seconded—even in a case where there was no reason for the chair to overlook this requirement—the absence of a second does not affect the validity of the motion’s adoption."

Once they let you make the 30-minute presentation without an immediate objection when you started, it's done.  If a motion was necessary to hear the presentation, then they already have allowed it without objection, which gives the same result as having adopted a motion to allow it.

All of us have to start somewhere learning parliamentary procedure and the correct terminology, so don't feel bad that you're not yet familiar with all the terminology.  So FYI, it's not called a "2nd motion," but is just called "a second."  Someone makes a motion, and either someone yells out "second!"  Or the chair asks, "Is there a second?" so as to prompt someone to then say, "Second!"  As a noun, it's called "a second."  As a verb, you might say that someone "seconded" the motion, or you might ask, "Was the motion seconded?"  Those are all proper phrasing, but there's just one motion (which in spite of the existence of a motion which has been "seconded," no one "firsted" the motion...rather, the first person "moved" or "made a motion") and then there is or isn't "a second," but not a "2nd motion."  When the chair asks, "Is there a second?" he already knows that at least one person wants to have the motion considered, and he is asking whether there is a second MEMBER who wants the motion considered.  He's not asking whether there's a "second motion."