Adjourning a meeting

[Guest Cheryl]

I checked on this site 3 or 4 years ago and found it much easier to navigate.  I'm not finding the information I found then in regard to adjourning a meeting.  Has it changed?  At the time, I found something along these lines:   

"When a body has completed the scheduled order of business at a meeting and there is no further business for the assembly to consider at that time, the chair may simply declare the meeting adjourned without a motion having been made. "

I've been doing it this way since.  Is this still true?  I still get people who insist a motion must be made and seconded to adjourn the meeting.  Thanks

 

[Rob Elsman]

Yep, the rule is the same.

[Weldon Merritt]

1 hour ago, Guest Cheryl said:

I still get people who insist a motion must be made and seconded to adjourn the meeting. 

You might ask them what they think happens if the motion is defeated. Do they think everyone has to stick around, even though there is no more business to conduct?

[Atul Kapur]

4 hours ago, Guest Cheryl said:

I still get people who insist a motion must be made and seconded to adjourn the meeting.

Ask them to show you the rule that says that.

If someone tries to turn the tables on you, quote Section 21:15: "When it appears that there is no further business in a meeting of an ordinary local society that normally goes through a complete order of business (41) at each regular meeting (9), the chair, instead of waiting or calling for a motion to adjourn, can ask, 'Is there any further business?' If there is no response, the chair can then say, 'Since there is no further business, the meeting is adjourned.' "