Effect of failure to rescind the second on a motion which has been rescinded

[Guest Tim Nelson]

A member of a Board of Appeals made a motion to approve granting an appeal, and another member seconded.  After discussion, three of the four members present agreed (along with the applicant) that the appeal should be tabled until further information is presented to the Board.  The member who made the original motion to approve moved to rescind the motion,  and after discussion the motion to rescind passed three to one.  The member who seconded the original motion to approve refused to move to rescind the second.  What is the status of the original motion to approve?  What (if any) action needs to be taken to resolve the status of the original motion?   What action can be taken on the Appeal at this point?

[Shmuel Gerber]

On 9/21/2023 at 8:35 PM, Guest Tim Nelson said:

A member of a Board of Appeals made a motion to approve granting an appeal, and another member seconded.  After discussion, three of the four members present agreed (along with the applicant) that the appeal should be tabled until further information is presented to the Board.  The member who made the original motion to approve moved to rescind the motion,  and after discussion the motion to rescind passed three to one.  The member who seconded the original motion to approve refused to move to rescind the second.  What is the status of the original motion to approve?  What (if any) action needs to be taken to resolve the status of the original motion?   What action can be taken on the Appeal at this point?

It it seems that what was intended is withdrawal of the motion, not rescinding. Permission for a motion to be withdrawn can be requested by the maker of the motion and  granted by majority vote. The seconder of the motion does not need to agree. 

[Gary Novosielski]

On 9/21/2023 at 8:35 PM, Guest Tim Nelson said:

A member of a Board of Appeals made a motion to approve granting an appeal, and another member seconded.  After discussion, three of the four members present agreed (along with the applicant) that the appeal should be tabled until further information is presented to the Board.  The member who made the original motion to approve moved to rescind the motion,  and after discussion the motion to rescind passed three to one.  The member who seconded the original motion to approve refused to move to rescind the second.  What is the status of the original motion to approve?  What (if any) action needs to be taken to resolve the status of the original motion?   What action can be taken on the Appeal at this point?

If I can piece together what happened, three members agreed that the motion should be "tabled" but no action to table or postpone the motion was actually adopted.  Then the mover moved to "rescind" the motion, and a vote was taken which passed..

Technically, it's not possible to rescind a motion that was never adopted in the first place.  But the main problem here seems to be the terminology being used.  "Tabling" the motion would not have been in order, but the proper motion would have been to Postpone the motion--but that seems not to have been done.   If the intent of the motion to "rescind" was to "un-move" it, the proper motion would have been requesting leave to withdraw, which would have that effect.  If that's what everyone believed--that they were voting to undo the motion, then I think in spite of the terminology mismatch, the motion was actually withdrawn.  

The status of the motion now is that it is no longer under consideration.  It would be possible to move it again at some point, or it could be allowed to rest in peace--whatever the parties prefer.  So its status is essentially as it was before it was moved.   

As far as the status of the appeal is concerned, it would be as it was before the motion was made.  If the Board of Appeals is still obligated to consider it, then they can take it up again.  The seconding or lack of it makes no difference at this point.

[puzzling]

This seems to be a very zmall committee (4 members in total or is this the quorum?) 

In such small committees seconding is not necessary at all.

In fact sdconding is not required in any committee 

[Josh Martin]

On 9/21/2023 at 7:35 PM, Guest Tim Nelson said:

A member of a Board of Appeals made a motion to approve granting an appeal, and another member seconded.  After discussion, three of the four members present agreed (along with the applicant) that the appeal should be tabled until further information is presented to the Board.  The member who made the original motion to approve moved to rescind the motion,  and after discussion the motion to rescind passed three to one.  The member who seconded the original motion to approve refused to move to rescind the second. 

This was handled rather poorly.

First, what I believe you mean to say is that the board wished to postpone (not table) the motion. See FAQ #12.

Second, a motion to "Rescind" was not the proper tool in the circumstances. That is used in reference to a motion which has been adopted. The motion to grant the appeal had not been adopted, and was still pending.

Instead, what should have been done was for a member to move to postpone the motion to grant the appeal to the next meeting. The motion to postpone is a subsidiary motion and is in order while a main motion is pending, so there was no need to "rescind" the original motion or second. The permission of the motion maker or seconder is not required to postpone the motion.

As Mr. Gerber suggests, another option would have been for the motion maker to request to withdraw the motion to grant the appeal, and for the board to adopt that motion. That would have the effect that it would be as if the motion to grant the appeal had never been made, and that motion could be made again at a later time. The motion to withdraw requires the consent of the motion maker, but still does not require the permission of the seconder.

On 9/21/2023 at 7:35 PM, Guest Tim Nelson said:

What is the status of the original motion to approve?

I'm not entirely sure. Apparently, the board adopted a motion to "rescind" the unadopted motion to approve the appeal, however, this doesn't make any sense.

Based upon all of the available facts, I am inclined to think the motion to "rescind" should be interpreted as a motion to Postpone to a Certain Time (or perhaps a motion to Postpone Indefinitely), since it sounds like that's what the board really wanted to do.

Since I suspect this is some sort of public body, I'd advise the board seek the advice of its clerks and attorneys, as there may be complicating factors in the board's rules or applicable law on this matter.

On 9/21/2023 at 7:35 PM, Guest Tim Nelson said:

What (if any) action needs to be taken to resolve the status of the original motion?

What I would advise is that at the following meeting, the chair make a statement to the effect of the following:

"At the previous meeting, the board wished to postpone a motion to grant an appeal. A member incorrectly moved to "rescind" the motion to grant the appeal, and this motion was adopted by the board. The chair apologizes for not correcting this error at the time. This leaves the status of the motion to grant the appeal in an ambiguous status. Based upon the board's discussion that it wished to delay the appeal until receiving more application from the applicant, the chair rules that the motion to "rescind" shall be treated as a motion to postpone. Accordingly, the motion to approve the appeal will be taken up at this meeting under Unfinished Business and General Orders, at which time the board may consider the motion to approve the appeal and take such action as it deems appropriate."

In the alternative, if one concurs with Mr. Novosielski and Mr. Gerber that this should be interpreted as a motion to withdraw, I would revise the statement to the following:

"At the previous meeting, the board wished to grant a member's request to withdraw a motion to grant an appeal. A member incorrectly moved to "rescind" the motion to grant the appeal, and this motion was adopted by the board. The chair apologizes for not correcting this error at the time. This leaves the status of the motion to grant the appeal in an ambiguous status. Based upon the board's discussion that it wished to delay the appeal until receiving more application from the applicant, the chair rules that the motion to "rescind" shall be treated as a motion to withdraw. Accordingly, the motion to approve the appeal is now withdrawn, and no further action shall be taken on this matter unless and until a new motion is made regarding the appeal."

But again, see the caveat above.

On 9/21/2023 at 7:35 PM, Guest Tim Nelson said:

What action can be taken on the Appeal at this point?

If the motion was postponed, then when the motion to grant the appeal is taken up, the board may take such action as it wishes.

If the motion was withdrawn, then a member may make a new motion in the future in regard to the appeal.

But again, see the caveat above.

On 9/22/2023 at 2:48 AM, puzzling said:

This seems to be a very zmall committee (4 members in total or is this the quorum?) 

In such small committees seconding is not necessary at all.

In fact sdconding is not required in any committee 

First, the post says this is a board, not a committee.

Further, I'm not certain from the facts presented whether this is in fact a "board" in the parliamentary sense, or is instead some sort of governmental body. In the latter case, seconds may well be required notwithstanding the small size of the board.

Edited September 22, 2023 at 12:11 PM by Josh Martin

[Gary Novosielski]

Given that a motion to "rescind" a pending question was (incorrectly) made (and received majority support), the intent of the body, it seems to me, was closer to withdrawal of the motion than to postponement of it.  Especially since the earlier idea to "table" it, pending further information, was floated but apparently went nowhere.