Withdrawing a second

[Tomm]

At last nights Annual Membership Meeting a member made a motion, it seconded and debate begun.

During debate another member asked the maker and seconder to withdraw his motion.

The chair never read the motion to the assembly so it was proper to allow the maker to  withdraw his motion but I don't believe it's necessary for the person who seconded the motion to do so too?

 

[Atul Kapur]

On 11/30/2023 at 8:39 AM, Tomm said:

The chair never read the motion to the assembly so it was proper to allow the maker to  withdraw his motion

I disagree. Once debate began the mover does not have the authority to unilaterally withdraw the motion. The chair despite not formally reading the motion, obviously has allowed it to be considered.

[Tomm]

On 11/30/2023 at 8:58 AM, Atul Kapur said:

Once debate began the mover does not have the authority to unilaterally withdraw the motion.

It was my understanding that the motion does not belong to the assembly until the chair states the motion immediately prior to taking the vote? 

[Atul Kapur]

That is incorrect. You are confusing at least a couple of things, including the difference between stating the question on the motion and putting the question.

Please carefully review §4 THE HANDLING OF A MOTION, particularly 4:19 and 4:23.

[Tomm]

On 11/30/2023 at 11:16 AM, Atul Kapur said:

Please carefully review §4 THE HANDLING OF A MOTION, particularly 4:19 and 4:23.

Okay, but I'm still confused?

As stated above, the chair never "stated" the motion let alone "putting the question" to the assembly.

The chair called the maker of the motion to the podium to read his motion. It was "seconded" and during the debate/discussion he was asked to withdraw his motion by another member, which he did. But someone said that the person who seconded the motion also needed to withdraw his second?

 

 

[Joshua Katz]

The chair's failure to handle the motion correctly does not give the member the right to withdraw it from an assembly that is actively debating it. Just like a point of order cannot be raised in an untimely manner, so too a procedural error does not mean we never cut off the time for things to happen.

[Tomm]

On 11/30/2023 at 12:12 PM, Joshua Katz said:

The chair's failure to handle the motion correctly does not give the member the right to withdraw it from an assembly that is actively debating it.

Okay, I think I've got it. The chair failed to "state" the question immediately after the motion was "seconded".  And after it was seconded, it no longer belonged to the maker?

But I'm still wondering if a motion is allowed to be withdrawn by the maker, does the second have to be withdrawn also? I believe NO!

Edited November 30, 2023 at 08:42 PM by Tomm
correction

[Josh Martin]

On 11/30/2023 at 7:39 AM, Tomm said:

At last nights Annual Membership Meeting a member made a motion, it seconded and debate begun.

During debate another member asked the maker and seconder to withdraw his motion.

The chair never read the motion to the assembly so it was proper to allow the maker to  withdraw his motion but I don't believe it's necessary for the person who seconded the motion to do so too?

If debate has already begun, the motion maker may withdraw the motion, but only with the assembly's permission. The fact that the motion has not yet been read doesn't change that.

I agree, however, that it's much too late for the seconder to withdraw his second.

On 11/30/2023 at 10:03 AM, Tomm said:

It was my understanding that the motion does not belong to the assembly until the chair states the motion immediately prior to taking the vote? 

This is incorrect.

You're correct that the motion does not belong to the assembly until the chair states the motion, but that step happens immediately after the motion is made and seconded.

The chair puts the question immediately prior to taking the vote.

On 11/30/2023 at 1:05 PM, Tomm said:

Okay, but I'm still confused?

As stated above, the chair never "stated" the motion let alone "putting the question" to the assembly.

Well, it sounds like the chair screwed up.

After the motion is made and seconded, the chair states the question.

The chair was correct not to put the question, because that doesn't happen until immediately prior to the vote.

Nonetheless, if debate has begun, the motion is clearly pending and is the property of the assembly, notwithstanding the chair's error.

On 11/30/2023 at 1:05 PM, Tomm said:

It was "seconded" and during the debate/discussion he was asked to withdraw his motion by another member, which he did. But someone said that the person who seconded the motion also needed to withdraw his second?

It is incorrect that the seconder needs to withdraw his second.

But to be clear, when the motion is already being debated, the motion maker cannot unilaterally withdraw the motion. It requires the assembly's consent, either by unanimous consent or by majority vote.

On 11/30/2023 at 2:26 PM, Tomm said:

So what am I missing? Are you saying that the maker of the motion should not have made the first reading of the motion and that the chair should have first "stated" the motion? 

Not really sure I understand the steps that you're relating to! 

Should or shouldn't the originator of the motion read his own motion?

If so, is that before or after the chair "states" the motion?

The steps are as follows:

1.) A member makes the motion, and the motion is read.

2.) A member seconds the motion.

3.) The chair "states" the question, which places it before the assembly. If necessary, the chair reads the motion again.

4.) Debate, amendments, etc.

5.) The chair "puts" the question.

6.) Vote

See RONR (12th ed.) Section 4 for more information.

On 11/30/2023 at 2:26 PM, Tomm said:

I get it, that after debate has been completed the chair "puts the question" to the assembly but I'm not really understand how we get from point A to point B and when the maker of the motion loses his ability to withdraw?

The maker of the motion loses his ability to unilaterally withdraw the motion after stating the question, which happens after the motion is made and seconded, but before debate.

After that time, and at any time before the question is put, the maker of the motion may still request to withdraw the motion, but this request is up to the assembly to grant or reject. The request may be (and often is) granted by unanimous consent. If there is an objection, a majority vote is sufficient to grant the request.

Edited November 30, 2023 at 08:44 PM by Josh Martin

[Joshua Katz]

The steps in the handling of a motion are its making, its seconding, the chair stating the motion, debate, the chair putting the question to a vote, and announcement of the result.

RONR says, as you noted above, that the right to unilaterally withdraw a motion ends when the chair states the question. In this case, from your description, the motion was made, seconded, and debated, without the chair stating it. The question, as I understand it, is whether the maker may unilaterally withdraw the motion during debate because of the chair's error.

The answer is no. The maker loses his right to unilaterally withdraw his motion when the chair *should* have stated the question, but did not, given that the assembly then moved on to the next step.

On 11/30/2023 at 3:26 PM, Tomm said:

Should or shouldn't the originator of the motion read his own motion?

 

Reading from papers requires permission of the assembly, but yes, the maker should state his motion when making it. "I move that we paint the treehouse green."

On 11/30/2023 at 3:26 PM, Tomm said:

If so, is that before or after the chair "states" the motion?

 

Before. After the member says "I move that we paint the treehouse green," and it is seconded, the chair will say "it has been moved and seconded that we paint the treehouse green. Is there any discussion?"

That's what wasn't done. The point is that failing to do it is not material to your question.

[Atul Kapur]

On 11/30/2023 at 3:26 PM, Tomm said:

The chair failed to "state" the question immediately after the motion was "seconded".  And after it was seconded, it no longer belonged to the maker?

The chair skipped the third step as outlined by @Josh Martin and which is the point when it no longer belongs to the maker. However, the chair allowed the group to go to step 4: debate, so, while not stated explicitly, step 3 was effectively completed.

[Shmuel Gerber]

On 11/30/2023 at 3:47 PM, Joshua Katz said:

Reading from papers requires permission of the assembly, but yes, the maker should state his motion when making it. "I move that we paint the treehouse green."

There's nothing wrong with a member's reading his motion from papers. In fact it is recommended. 

[Joshua Katz]

Fair enough.

[Drake Savory]

Here is a question related to this thread:

Maker makes a motion.  It is seconded.

Chair starts debate.  After a sentence or two (debate has started but timely objection).  Member makes a Point of Order that the Chair did not state the question.

Chair rules the Point to be well taken.

The maker immediately asks to withdraw the motion before the Chair can properly state the question.

Is the motion withdrawn?

[Josh Martin]

On 12/3/2023 at 9:25 AM, Drake Savory said:

Here is a question related to this thread:

Maker makes a motion.  It is seconded.

Chair starts debate.  After a sentence or two (debate has started but timely objection).  Member makes a Point of Order that the Chair did not state the question.

Chair rules the Point to be well taken.

The maker immediately asks to withdraw the motion before the Chair can properly state the question.

Is the motion withdrawn?

In this rather unusual set of facts, yes, I think the chair should announce that the motion is withdrawn. In the set of facts described, a member promptly raises a timely Point of Order regarding the chair's failure to state the question, and it is this step which formally places the question before the assembly for action. The chair then rules this Point of Order is well taken, essentially ruling that the motion is not, in fact, before the assembly. This ruling is not appealed from, and therefore stands as the judgment of the assembly. The chair then proceeds to state the question on the motion, but the motion maker proceeds to withdraw the motion before this can be done - which he may do, since the question has not yet been stated.

Of course, as in any case where a motion is withdrawn, another member can simply make the motion themselves, if desired.

I think what distinguishes this set of facts from that raised by the OP is that it sounded like, in that situation, debate had proceeded for some time, no Point of Order regarding the chair's failure to state the question was raised, and even if it was raised, it would no longer be timely.

Edited December 3, 2023 at 03:51 PM by Josh Martin

[Shmuel Gerber]

On 12/3/2023 at 10:25 AM, Drake Savory said:

Here is a question related to this thread:

Maker makes a motion.  It is seconded.

Chair starts debate.  After a sentence or two (debate has started but timely objection).  Member makes a Point of Order that the Chair did not state the question.

Chair rules the Point to be well taken.

The maker immediately asks to withdraw the motion before the Chair can properly state the question.

Is the motion withdrawn?

What do you mean by "Chair starts debate"? 

[Atul Kapur]

On 12/3/2023 at 10:25 AM, Drake Savory said:

After a sentence or two (debate has started but timely objection)

I would say it was not timely once any member has started debating. I would allow a point of order up to the point that a member has been recognized but before they start speaking. Because

On 12/3/2023 at 10:25 AM, Drake Savory said:

Chair starts debate.

sounds like this is the same moment as the OP's situation: 

On 11/30/2023 at 3:50 PM, Atul Kapur said:

the chair allowed the group to go to step 4: debate, so, while not stated explicitly, step 3 was effectively completed.

 

[Joshua Katz]

I guess I tend to think of timeliness as akin to Heraclitus.

[Drake Savory]

On 12/3/2023 at 8:57 AM, Shmuel Gerber said:

What do you mean by "Chair starts debate"? 

"You may speak to your motion."

In my scenario it is followed by

"I believe this would help ..."

"Mr. President, I rise to a Point of Order.  The Chair has not stated the question."

[Drake Savory]

On 12/3/2023 at 10:47 AM, Joshua Katz said:

I guess I tend to think of timeliness as akin to Heraclitus.

I think timeliness needs to account for a moment to process what just happened.

[Al Dunbar]

there was very little discussion here of the seconder having any involvement in the process of withdrawing a motion. I do not see the point of this. the seconder does not take ownership of the motion by seconding it. the only purpose of seconding a motion is to allow it to be considered. There is no requirement for the seconder to even be in agreement with the motion, just in agreement with the idea that it should be considered.

If the situation is such that the mover of the motion is allowed to withdraw it without the agreement of the assembly, that right is his, not that of the seconder. if the mover does withdraw the motion, then there is no pending motion for anyone else to withdraw, including the seconder. And there would be no need to withdraw his seconding of the motion one it has been withdrawn.

That said, if a person seconds a motion and then immediately regrets having done so, It may be valid for them to withdraw his seconding of it

[Dan Honemann]

On 12/5/2023 at 1:17 AM, Al Dunbar said:

there was very little discussion here of the seconder having any involvement in the process of withdrawing a motion.

I suppose that's because he doesn't really have any.

[Josh Martin]

On 12/5/2023 at 12:17 AM, Al Dunbar said:

there was very little discussion here of the seconder having any involvement in the process of withdrawing a motion.

There isn't much to discuss regarding this.

If the motion has not yet been stated by the chair, the seconder may withdraw his second. Of course, a different member could simply second the motion.

If the motion has been stated by the chair, the seconder no longer has any involvement in the process of withdrawing a motion.
 

On 12/5/2023 at 12:17 AM, Al Dunbar said:

If the situation is such that the mover of the motion is allowed to withdraw it without the agreement of the assembly, that right is his, not that of the seconder. if the mover does withdraw the motion, then there is no pending motion for anyone else to withdraw, including the seconder. And there would be no need to withdraw his seconding of the motion one it has been withdrawn.

That said, if a person seconds a motion and then immediately regrets having done so, It may be valid for them to withdraw his seconding of it

Seems like you've got it.