President seconding motions

[Guest Deanne]

This is a dump question for ROO land...the President on our Board of Directors has been seconding motions.

This is improper, correct?

If yes, the motion is non-binding, correct?

[David A Foulkes]

In meetings of a small board (about a dozen or fewer members in attendance), it would not be improper, but seconds are not required in such meetings according to the "relaxed rules" of RONR for small board meetings anyway. 

 

Otherwise, in large board meetings or meetings of the general membership, it would be improper, but assuming the President is also a member of the assembly that is meeting, s/he does retain all rights of membership, including seconding motions.  However, and further assuming s/he is the chair of the meeting, s/he should present an appearance of impartiality, and refrain from making and seconding motions, debating motions, or voting on motions except if by ballot of if his/her vote could affect the result.

 

The fact that the President seconded the motion does not otherwise cause the motion to be non-binding if adopted.

[jstackpo]

And furthermore...

 

One of the purposes of a second is to see if anybody else thinks the motion is even worth considering.  If nobody does, then the president has that much of an easier job  --  not "doing" that motion  --  and a shorter meeting.

 

So it is to the pres's advantage to not second motions  --  he is just making work for himself if he does!

 

This observation doesn't apply in small boards where, as noted, no seconds are required.

[Josh Martin]

One of the purposes of a second is to see if anybody else thinks the motion is even worth considering.  If nobody does, then the president has that much of an easier job  --  not "doing" that motion  --  and a shorter meeting.

 

So it is to the pres's advantage to not second motions  --  he is just making work for himself if he does!

 

On the other hand, in some cases it would be appropriate for the chair to state the question on a motion without waiting for a second, provided no member promptly raises a Point of Order (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 36, line 32 - pg. 37, line 9).

[Guest Guest]

Thank you all for your professional input and clarification.

[Rockp2]

And, correct me if i'm wrong, even if the President seconding motions was out of order, wouldn't it still be a valid adoption of the motion after the meeting if no one raises the Point of Order during the meeting?

[Josh Martin]

And, correct me if i'm wrong, even if the President seconding motions was out of order, wouldn't it still be a valid adoption of the motion after the meeting if no one raises the Point of Order during the meeting?

 

Yes. After all, even a Point of Order regarding the lack of a second must be raised very promptly - "during the meeting" is actually far too lenient. Such a Point of Order must be raised before debate has begun in order to be timely (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 37, lines 9-16).