Motion Second

[Guest Nancy]

Does a motion to approve minutes require a second if there are no noted objections?  Thank you

[Dan Honemann]

15 minutes ago, Guest Nancy said:

Does a motion to approve minutes require a second if there are no noted objections?  Thank you

No. As a matter of fact, no motion is needed to approve the minutes. The question comes up automatically.

[Guest Puzzling]

9 minutes ago, Guest Nancy said:

Does a motion to approve minutes require a second if there are no noted objections?  Thank you

To approve the minutes does not even need a motion.

After after  the amendments of the minutes (that can need a motion if some member object to the amendment) are decided and there are no other motions made the president can just declare the minutes adopted.

 

[Dan Honemann]

2 minutes ago, Guest Puzzling said:

After after  the amendments of the minutes (that can need a motion if some member object to the amendment) are decided and there are no other motions made the president can just declare the minutes adopted.

Although it would be better if he declared that the minutes were approved.

[Joshua Katz]

Here we go...

[Richard Brown]

2 hours ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

Although it would be better if he declared that the minutes were approved.

 

1 hour ago, Joshua Katz said:

Here we go...

But Mr. Honemann has it right.... right out of the book.  Minutes get approved, not adopted!

[Guest Puzzling]

Sorry 🤯

[RSW]

17 hours ago, Guest Nancy said:

if there are no noted objections

And if I'm understanding the rules correctly, it's not actually possible to "object" to the minutes themselves in the same way one could potentially object to a motion - only to propose a correction and/or object to a proposed correction. RONR 41:10-11:

Quote

A formal motion to approve the minutes is not necessary, although such a motion is not out of order. After the minutes have been read (or after their reading has been omitted by unanimous consent as described in the previous paragraph), and whether or not a motion for approval has been offered, the chair asks, “Are there any corrections to the minutes?” and pauses. Corrections, when proposed, are usually handled by unanimous consent (4:58–63), but if any member objects to a proposed correction—which is, in effect, a subsidiary motion to Amend—the usual rules governing consideration of amendments to a main motion are applicable (see 12).

After any proposed corrections have been disposed of, and when there is no response to the chair’s inquiry, “Are there any corrections [or “further corrections”] to the minutes?” the chair says, “There being no corrections [or “no further corrections”] to the minutes, the minutes stand [or “are”] approved [or “approved as read,” or “approved as corrected”].” The minutes are thus approved without any formal vote, even if a motion for their approval has been made.

 

[Joshua Katz]

7 minutes ago, RSW said:

And if I'm understanding the rules correctly, it's not actually possible to "object" to the minutes themselves in the same way one could potentially object to a motion - only to propose a correction and/or object to a proposed correction. RONR 41:10-11:

Quote

Are you saying no objection to consideration? I agree with that. But if you mean object to unanimous consent, I don't agree. I think when you propose an amendment, you are withholding unanimous support temporarily for the motion to accept the minutes as read.

[Josh Martin]

35 minutes ago, RSW said:

And if I'm understanding the rules correctly, it's not actually possible to "object" to the minutes themselves in the same way one could potentially object to a motion - only to propose a correction and/or object to a proposed correction. RONR 41:10-11:

 

25 minutes ago, Joshua Katz said:

Are you saying no objection to consideration? I agree with that. But if you mean object to unanimous consent, I don't agree. I think when you propose an amendment, you are withholding unanimous support temporarily for the motion to accept the minutes as read.

I believe that what RSW is saying is that the only manner in which a member may object to the approval of the minutes is to propose a correction.

[RSW]

43 minutes ago, Josh Martin said:

I believe that what RSW is saying is that the only manner in which a member may object to the approval of the minutes is to propose a correction.

Correct. I'm saying that a member can't prevent the minutes from being approved without proposing a correction. 

Which may be why RONR's phrasing isn't one of the chair entertaining a motion for approval, but rather “Are there any corrections to the minutes?” and “There being no corrections [or “no further corrections”] to the minutes, the minutes stand [or “are”] approved [or “approved as read,” or “approved as corrected”].”

It's a nitpicky point, but I've seen goofy things like a member (who wasn't at the previous meeting) being unhappy with a decision made *at* that meeting, and arguing with the approval of the minutes, or wanting to use the approval to get into debate to re-hash something that happened - as if that made some sort of difference. 

Guest Nancy's wording made me wonder if that sort of thing was potentially happening in their meetings.

Edited April 14, 2021 at 02:19 PM by RSW

[Richard Brown]

4 hours ago, RSW said:

And if I'm understanding the rules correctly, it's not actually possible to "object" to the minutes themselves in the same way one could potentially object to a motion - only to propose a correction and/or object to a proposed correction. RONR 41:10-11:

Yes, that is correct.  The only way to "object" to the minutes being approved is to propose a correction.... or to move to postpone approval or to refer it to a committee or to the board. If there is disagreement as to whether the minutes are correct even after the consideration or adoption of corrections, the assembly may postpone approval of the minutes until the next meeting or refer it to a committee (or to the executive board).

Edited to add:  The assembly may also postpone approval until later in the same meeting.  That might be appropriate if an absent member with knowledge as to the precise wording of a motion (such as the member who made the motion) can be reached by telephone for clarification.  Or perhaps that member isn't present at the time the minutes are up for approval but is expected to arrive later.

Edited April 14, 2021 at 05:19 PM by Richard Brown
Added last paragraph