Our Town Meeting is governed by/operates under Robert's Rules. The Moderator is elected each year to a 1 year term. Town Meeting Members are elected to 3 year terms.
The Presiding Officer (the Moderator) can and does appoint a deputy, should the need arise for Moderator to recuse herself for any reason.
There are 3 articles on the agenda/warrant that the Moderator opposes. He has stated his opinion on local access television/podcast and plans to recuse himself by calling his deputy to moderate the discussion so he can speak in opposition to the articles. The deputy has the same opinions on the articles.
One member of the body did some research that indicates the Moderator speaking to oppose (or support) is frowned upon:
The chairman sometimes calls a member to the chair and takes part in the debate. This should rarely be done, and nothing can justify it in a case where much feeling is shown and there is a liability to difficulty in preserving order. If the chairman has even the appearance of being a partisan, he loses much of his ability to control those who are on the opposite side of the question. There is nothing to justify the unfortunate habit some chairmen have of constantly speaking on questions before the assembly, even interrupting the member who has the floor. One who expects to take an active part in debate should never accept the chair, or at least should not resume the chair, after having made his speech, until after the pending question is disposed of.1 The presiding officer of a large assembly should never be chosen for any reason except his ability to preside.
1. "Though the Speaker (Chairman) may of right speak to matters of order and be first heard, he is restrained from speaking on any other subject except where the House have occasion for facts within his knowledge; then he may, with their leave, state the matter of fact." [Jefferson's Manual, sec. XVII.]
"It is a general rule in all deliberative assemblies, that the presiding officer shall not participate in the debate or other proceedings, in any other capacity than as such officer. He is only allowed, therefore, to state matters of fact within his knowledge; to inform the assembly on points of order or the course of proceeding when called upon for that purpose, or when he finds it necessary to do so; and, on appeals from his decision on questions of order, to address the assembly in debate. [Cushing's Manual, §202.]
My questions: By a point of order, is it appropriate to object? Is it simply out of the control of the members of the body?
I am a former Moderator and recused myself from all aspects of any article put forth by my (then) most recent committee. I did not offer my opinion on any articles.
Thanks in advance for your feedback and advice.
