Making or seconding motions

[Guest Veegee]

May the chair make or second motions?

[Rev Ed]

May the chair make or second motions?

 

If you can give us some more details, we can give you a better answer.  However, in general, here are some possible answers:

 

In a Committee, or at a Board meeting operating under the relaxed rules of RONR, then the Chairman can fully participate in the meeting, which means that the Chairman can make motions - however seconds would not then be required.

 

In a 'large' Board, or in a meeting of the general membership, then no the Chairman should not be making motion or seconding motions while chairing the meeting.

 

However, if the Chairman is a member of the group meeting, then the Chairman is still a member and has all the rights of membership so cannot be prevented from making or seconding a motion, even though it is discouraged as the Chairman should be keeping the appearance of being impartial.  As such, the Chairman can temporarily pass the chair over to the Vice-Chairman/Vice President (or another member if the Vice-Chairman/Vice President is absent) in order to participate in part of the meeting - which would allow the Chairman to make a motion or second a motion.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

If the chair is certain that a motion meets with wide approval but members are slow in seconding it, he can state the question without waiting for a second.

[RONR 11th ed., p. 36]

 

Perhaps it would be prudent for the chair merely to officially state the motion (thus putting the motion before the meeting) instead of seconding it aloud, and thus violate the goal of establishing an air of impartiality. [RONR 11th ed. p. 382 and p. 22]

[Timothy]

If the chair is certain that a motion meets with wide approval but members are slow in seconding it, he can state the question without waiting for a second.

[RONR 11th ed., p. 36]

 

Perhaps it would be prudent for the chair merely to officially state the motion (thus putting the motion before the meeting) instead of seconding it aloud, and thus violate the goal of establishing an air of impartiality. [RONR 11th ed. p. 382 and p. 22]

 

Probably true, but there are bound to be people thinking, "Isn't there supposed to be a second?" Not that that should matter, but some of them will come here to ask about it.

[Richard Brown]

Probably true, but there are bound to be people thinking, "Isn't there supposed to be a second?" Not that that should matter, but some of them will come here to ask about it.

 

You can probably count on it!!   Even though a second isn't absolutely required, if I'm presiding, I sometimes like to ask for one just so that nobody will pipe up later and try to claim, "That motion wasn't validly adopted because nobody ever seconded it".  It's just one less issue to have to deal with and of not doing anything to create distrust among the members.

[Rev Ed]

You can probably count on it!!   Even though a second isn't absolutely required, if I'm presiding, I sometimes like to ask for one just so that nobody will pipe up later and try to claim, "That motion wasn't validly adopted because nobody ever seconded it".  It's just one less issue to have to deal with and of not doing anything to create distrust among the members.

 

To me, it's not just that, it's that depending on the group people sometimes need to be 'pushed' into the right direction.  In other words, if you don't ask for a second, some people may not know that they can second the motion.

[Gary Novosielski]

On the other hand, it can get people into the habit of saying nothing and waiting for the chair to ask "is there a second", which can develop into something of a time waster if a lot of items are on the agenda.