Individual motions & seconds from within a unit

[Guest Paul Overton]

Can a second come from the same unit that made the original motion?  Only the unit, as a whole, is able to vote on any given action brought to the floor.  In this example the unit is part of a 3 unit board comprised of 3-7 members within each unit.  Each member is able to make motions and the there's been a long thought requirement that a second must come from a different unit.  

[Richard Brown]

Based on what you have told us, it appears to me that if each member can make a motion, then any member can second a motion.  I personally see no requirement, based on what we have been told, that a second has to come from a member of a different unit.  However, this is ultimately a matter of bylaws interpretation, so it is ultimately up to the member of your organization to interpret your own bylaws.  We cannot do that for you.

[Josh Martin]

On 2/22/2023 at 10:42 AM, Guest Paul Overton said:

Can a second come from the same unit that made the original motion?  Only the unit, as a whole, is able to vote on any given action brought to the floor.  In this example the unit is part of a 3 unit board comprised of 3-7 members within each unit.  Each member is able to make motions and the there's been a long thought requirement that a second must come from a different unit.  

I'm not sure. On the one hand, we are told that "In this example the unit is part of a 3 unit board comprised of 3-7 members within each unit" and that "Each member is able to make motions." These facts would seem to suggest that each member is also able to second motions.

On the other hand, we are also told that "Only the unit, as a whole, is able to vote on any given action brought to the floor." This somewhat complicates matters. Under the rules in RONR, a member is an individual person who has a right to make motions, second motions, speak in debate, and to have one vote. This principle is stated in several places in RONR - see RONR (12th ed.) 1:4, 45:2, 45:70.

"It is a fundamental principle of parliamentary law that each person who is a member of a deliberative assembly is entitled to one—and only one—vote on a question. This is true even if a person is elected or appointed to more than one position, each of which would entitle the holder to a vote. For example, in a convention, a person selected as delegate by more than one constituent body may cast only one vote. An individual member's right to vote may not be transferred to another person (for example, by the use of proxies)." RONR (12th ed.) 45:2

An organization certainly may deviate from these rules if it wishes, and it appears this organization has done so. But deviating from such a fundamental principle of parliamentary law will have some rather significant effects. It would seem to me that in an organization where "Only the unit, as a whole, is able to vote on any given action brought to the floor" and "the unit is part of a 3 unit board comprised of 3-7 members within each unit," these persons are not "members" in the sense this term is used in RONR, and RONR therefore has no direct answer to the question of what rights these persons have.

The other thing to consider is that RONR provides that under the small board rules, seconds are not required at all, which would make this question moot. They are generally used in boards with not more than about a dozen members present. This board apparently has between nine and twenty-one "members," and also has only three voting "units," which vote as a whole. It seems to me that using the small board rules would be reasonable, although that is ultimately a decision for the board to make.

Ultimately, it is up to the organization to interpret its own bylaws. In the long run, it would be advisable to adopt rules clarifying this matter.

[laser158689]

Historically, did a person from another unit do the seconding or another unit?

If the unit, did the seconding unit have an internal vote on whether or not to second?

[Atul Kapur]

On 2/22/2023 at 11:42 AM, Guest Paul Overton said:

Only the unit, as a whole, is able to vote on any given action brought to the floor.  In this example the unit is part of a 3 unit board comprised of 3-7 members within each unit.

To help clarify your situation, how many votes can be cast on a motion? Is it just a maximum of three votes on any motion?

[Guest Paul Overton]

Historically a second has been from a unit different than what made the motion.  There has been no discussion from within the unit as to second or not.  Solely the individual's choice from within that unit.  The majority of the members from within the unit determine the vote for that unit.  The unit must have a minimum of 2 members present to cast a vote.  When only one member is present, that member may motion or second items that are discussed, but they can't vote.

 

Only one vote per unit with a maximum of 3 votes.

[Atul Kapur]

You should write these down and adopt them as special rules, as they are unique to your organization and different from what is in RONR, which I assume is your parliamentary authority. As you've seen in the responses above, a member under RONR has the right to move, second, debate, and vote. 

While you're doing that, consider specifying that a second is not needed at all in this body with, effectively, three voting members (the units, as opposed to the individuals).

 

[Josh Martin]

On 2/22/2023 at 5:16 PM, Guest Paul Overton said:

Historically a second has been from a unit different than what made the motion.  There has been no discussion from within the unit as to second or not.  Solely the individual's choice from within that unit.  The majority of the members from within the unit determine the vote for that unit.  The unit must have a minimum of 2 members present to cast a vote.  When only one member is present, that member may motion or second items that are discussed, but they can't vote.

Only one vote per unit with a maximum of 3 votes.

Based upon these additional facts, I would first suggest that the best course of action is to eliminate the requirement for a second altogether. Setting aside the complexities of this situation for a moment, imagine a board which consisted only of three members. It probably would not be reasonable to require a second in such a small board.

"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." RONR (12th ed.) 4:12

But this rule is written with a larger assembly in mind. In committees and small boards, RONR recognizes that it is reasonable to discuss motions based solely upon one member, especially in a very small assembly with three members. If the assembly simply stops requiring seconds, then it no longer needs to worry about whether the second comes from a different unit.

In the event the assembly chooses to continue to require seconds, then based upon the fact that whether to second a motion is "Solely the individual's choice from within that unit," my view is that there is no requirement that a second from a member from a different unit, notwithstanding the custom to the contrary. If the assembly wishes to require that a second must come from a different unit, then the assembly should adopt a rule specifying as much.

The assembly may also wish to consider whether it is reasonable to require members to vote as a unit but to be able to make and second motions individually. This could lead to some rather absurd results, such as a motion being made and seconded which ultimately receives zero votes in favor. It may be preferable to require the majority of the members of a unit to agree upon making a motion (and possibly seconding a motion, to the extent the assembly continues to require seconds).

Another alternative the assembly may wish to consider is to have an actual three member board, with one member elected by and from the members of each unit. That would make things a lot simpler.

Edited February 23, 2023 at 02:47 PM by Josh Martin