Can the Chair make a motion?

[Guest Lee]

Can the chairman of a meeting make a motion? If so, how does the chairman go about making the motion?

Thanks in advance.

Lee

[Guest Lee]

By the way, I read FAQ #1 and do not understand it. Does it mean that a presiding officer/chair must relinquish his role for the purpose of making the motion? Can someone please explain it more simply for me?

[hmtcastle]

By the way, I read FAQ #1 and do not understand it. Does it mean that a presiding officer/chair must relinquish his role for the purpose of making the motion? Can someone please explain it more simply for me?

If the chair is a member of the body that is meeting (which he usually is), he has the same rights as any other member. So he can make a motion, he can second a motion, he can debate a motion, and he can vote on a motion.

But, except in small boards (where not more than about a dozen members are present) the chair should maintain the appearance of impartiality. So, even though he can, he generally should not make motions, second motions, debate motions, or vote . . . unless the vote is by ballot (in which case no one will no how he voted) or if his vote could make a difference in the outcome.

If the chair feels like he has to make a motion or engage in debate, he should step down until the question is disposed of. But this should be a very rare event.

[Gary Novosielski]

By the way, I read FAQ #1 and do not understand it. Does it mean that a presiding officer/chair must relinquish his role for the purpose of making the motion? Can someone please explain it more simply for me?

No, it does not say that he must. It says that he should, in order to preserve the impartiality required of a presiding officer of an assembly.

This is especially true for a large assembly. In small boards or meetings smaller than about a dozen members, the chair normally makes motions and votes like any other member.

But although a wise chair knows when not to exercise his rights, he doesn't lose them.

If the chair wants to participate on one side of a motion, he should relinquish the chair (to the VP) and sit with the assembly. He should not resume the chair until the motion is completely disposed of, i.e., all debate is done and the vote taken, or otherwise by referring to a committee, postponing, etc.

[Guest Lee]

No, it does not say that he must. It says that he should, in order to preserve the impartiality required of a presiding officer of an assembly.

This is especially true for a large assembly. In small boards or meetings smaller than about a dozen members, the chair normally makes motions and votes like any other member.

But although a wise chair knows when not to exercise his rights, he doesn't lose them.

If the chair wants to participate on one side of a motion, he should relinquish the chair (to the VP) and sit with the assembly. He should not resume the chair until the motion is completely disposed of, i.e., all debate is done and the vote taken, or otherwise by referring to a committee, postponing, etc.

On what pages in the in-brief edition and the 10th edition can I locate this information? I'm certain the members will like substantiated information.

Thanks again.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

On what pages in the in-brief edition and the 10th edition can I locate this information?

I'm certain the members will like substantiated information.

Question 1:

Is it true that the president can vote only to break a tie?

Answer:


No, it is not true that the president can vote only to break a tie. If the president is a member of the assembly, he or she has exactly the same rights and privileges as all other members have, including the right to make motions, speak in debate and to vote on all questions. However, the impartiality required of the presiding officer of an assembly (especially a large one) precludes exercising the right to make motions or debate while presiding, and also requires refraining from voting except (i) when the vote is by ballot, or (ii) whenever his or her vote will affect the result.

When will the chair's vote affect the result? On a vote which is not by ballot, if a majority vote is required and there is a tie, he or she may vote in the affirmative to cause the motion to prevail. If there is one more in the affirmative than in the negative, he or she can create a tie by voting in the negative to cause the motion to fail. Similarly, if a two-thirds vote is required, he or she may vote either to cause, or to block, attainment of the necessary two thirds.

[RONR (10th ed.), p. 392-93; see also Table A, p.190 of RONR In Brief.]

Oh, I don't know.

Try:

RONR (10th ed.), p. 392-93;

see also Table A, p.190 of RONR In Brief.

[David A Foulkes]

By the way, I read FAQ #1 and do not understand it. Does it mean that a presiding officer/chair must relinquish his role for the purpose of making the motion? Can someone please explain it more simply for me?

You might be served by looking at pages 382-383 - "Rules against the chair's participation in debate" which may be of help as regards this part of your question.

[Guest Lee]

The following was brought to my attention, from parlipro.org:

Can the chairman make motions?

Yes, the chairman, if a member, has the same RIGHT to make a motion as any other member. In small small boards of not more than about a dozen members present, the chairman usually participates the same as other members. However, in larger assemblies, the chairman has a duty to remain impartial, so would usually not make a motion directly. The chairman could say, for example, "The chairman will entertain a motion to..." and then wait for a member to make it, or "Is there a motion to suspend the rules that interfere with hearing the speaker at this time?"

The chairman may also assume a motion, as in: "If there are no [further] corrections, the minutes stand approved as read [as corrected]." or "If there is no further business to come before the meeting, this meeting will now adjourn. [pause] Hearing none, this meeting is adjourned."

So you see, without actually directly making a motion, the chair can accomplish pretty much the same thing without blatantly compromising his or her impartiality. Another option is to ask someone before the meeting to make a motion that the chair wishes to be considered. After all, the chairman is a member, too, and has just as much right to have things go their way as any other member. Accepting the job of chairman does not remove any rights as a member. For more information, refer to RONR 10th ed. pp. 470-471, 343, 210, 234, 490.

Does anyone have an objection to the above information as a round about way of making a motion as a chair?

[Rob Elsman]

The following was brought to my attention, from parlipro.org:

Can the chairman make motions?

Yes, the chairman, if a member, has the same RIGHT to make a motion as any other member. In small small boards of not more than about a dozen members present, the chairman usually participates the same as other members. However, in larger assemblies, the chairman has a duty to remain impartial, so would usually not make a motion directly. The chairman could say, for example, "The chairman will entertain a motion to..." and then wait for a member to make it, or "Is there a motion to suspend the rules that interfere with hearing the speaker at this time?"

The chairman may also assume a motion, as in: "If there are no [further] corrections, the minutes stand approved as read [as corrected]." or "If there is no further business to come before the meeting, this meeting will now adjourn. [pause] Hearing none, this meeting is adjourned."

So you see, without actually directly making a motion, the chair can accomplish pretty much the same thing without blatantly compromising his or her impartiality. Another option is to ask someone before the meeting to make a motion that the chair wishes to be considered. After all, the chairman is a member, too, and has just as much right to have things go their way as any other member. Accepting the job of chairman does not remove any rights as a member. For more information, refer to RONR 10th ed. pp. 470-471, 343, 210, 234, 490.

Does anyone have an objection to the above information as a round about way of making a motion as a chair?

None of this suggests that the chairman makes a motion, in the sense discussed in RONR (10th ed.), pp. 32-33.

[hmtcastle]

Does anyone have an objection to the above information as a round about way of making a motion as a chair?

Yes.

[Guest Lee]

Yes.

Rather, let me restate: is this also a legitimate method for a presiding officer to entertain a motion he wants made without having to relinquish his chair?

Thanks.

[Rob Elsman]

Rather, let me restate: is this also a legitimate method for a presiding officer to entertain a motion he wants made without having to relinquish his chair?

Thanks.

It is hard to answer your question directly in the hypothetical, since the proper exercise of the chairman's duties depends so much on the context of the current parliamentary situation. For example, take a look at RONR, Off. Interp. 2007-1, www.robertsrules.com, for a discussion on the proper situations when a chairman can assume a motion. Can he always assume a motion? No. Can he ever assume a motion? Yes.

[Dan Honemann]

The chairman may also assume a motion, as in: "If there are no [further] corrections, the minutes stand approved as read [as corrected]." or "If there is no further business to come before the meeting, this meeting will now adjourn. [pause] Hearing none, this meeting is adjourned."

Unfortunately, this is an incorrect statement. These are not examples of the chair assuming a motion.

[hmtcastle]

Rather, let me restate: is this also a legitimate method for a presiding officer to entertain a motion he wants made without having to relinquish his chair?

If you're saying, "that The chairman could say, for example, 'The chairman will entertain a motion to...' and then wait for a member to make it", and the motion is to paint the clubhouse red, I'd say that's too much like making a motion to paint the clubhouse red.

[MirelesMD]

The following was brought to my attention, from parlipro.org:

Can the chairman make motions?

Yes, the chairman, if a member, has the same RIGHT to make a motion as any other member. In small small boards of not more than about a dozen members present, the chairman usually participates the same as other members. However, in larger assemblies, the chairman has a duty to remain impartial, so would usually not make a motion directly. The chairman could say, for example, "The chairman will entertain a motion to..." and then wait for a member to make it, or "Is there a motion to suspend the rules that interfere with hearing the speaker at this time?"

The chairman may also assume a motion, as in: "If there are no [further] corrections, the minutes stand approved as read [as corrected]." or "If there is no further business to come before the meeting, this meeting will now adjourn. [pause] Hearing none, this meeting is adjourned."

So you see, without actually directly making a motion, the chair can accomplish pretty much the same thing without blatantly compromising his or her impartiality. Another option is to ask someone before the meeting to make a motion that the chair wishes to be considered. After all, the chairman is a member, too, and has just as much right to have things go their way as any other member. Accepting the job of chairman does not remove any rights as a member. For more information, refer to RONR 10th ed. pp. 470-471, 343, 210, 234, 490.

Does anyone have an objection to the above information as a round about way of making a motion as a chair?

Brother Lee,

This is what I understand the basics to be:

1. The Chair, being a member of the assembly, has the right to make motions.

2. The Chair, should maintain an impartial attitude, and thus not excercise his right to make motions.

3. Statement #2, is a suggestion and not a law, because if it was it would violate the basic tenants of Statement #1.

4. The act of "entertaing a motion" seems to place the legitimacy of the motion on the member who "so moves" the motion, and not the chair. That being stated, it seems that this is an contorsion of the impartiality suggestion and serves no purpose other than to complicate the issue. It assumes the assembly is ignorant of the fact that the chair is indeed making a motion (through proxy). Would it not be easier for the chair to just make the motion.

AEKDB

Brother Joe

[Josh Martin]

Rather, let me restate: is this also a legitimate method for a presiding officer to entertain a motion he wants made without having to relinquish his chair?

No. "The chair's ability to 'assume' a motion that has not actually been made by another member exists to facilitate the business of the assembly, not to give the chair an opportunity to make a motion whose consideration he or she, as an individual member, believes would be desirable." (RONR Off. Interp. 2007-1)

This is what I understand the basics to be:

1. The Chair, being a member of the assembly, has the right to make motions.

2. The Chair, should maintain an impartial attitude, and thus not excercise his right to make motions.

3. Statement #2, is a suggestion and not a law, because if it was it would violate the basic tenants of Statement #1.

4. The act of "entertaing a motion" seems to place the legitimacy of the motion on the member who "so moves" the motion, and not the chair. That being stated, it seems that this is an contorsion of the impartiality suggestion and serves no purpose other than to complicate the issue. It assumes the assembly is ignorant of the fact that the chair is indeed making a motion (through proxy). Would it not be easier for the chair to just make the motion.

Keep in mind that Statement #2 does not apply in small boards or committees. In such settings, the chair participates the same as any other member. The device of "entertaining" a motion serves a similar purpose to the device of "assuming" a motion, and should again be used in order to facilitate the conduct of business, not to advance the consideration of a motion the chair personally supports. If the chair of a large assembly does intend to make a motion he personally supports, he should indeed relinquish the chair, and should not return to the chair until the pending main question has been disposed of. The chair should only follow this procedure rarely, when he believes that there is a matter of such urgency that his responsibility as a member outweighs his duties as chair. Overuse of this procedure may undermine the assembly's confidence in the chair's impartiality.

[Trina]

Rather, let me restate: is this also a legitimate method for a presiding officer to entertain a motion he wants made without having to relinquish his chair?

Thanks.

If you're saying, "that The chairman could say, for example, 'The chairman will entertain a motion to...' and then wait for a member to make it", and the motion is to paint the clubhouse red, I'd say that's too much like making a motion to paint the clubhouse red.

And if you've ever attended a meeting at which the chair tries this type of maneuver -- as in, "The chair will entertain a motion to paint the clubhouse red" or "The chair will entertain a motion to allocate $200 to purchase new tables for the clubhouse" -- you'll realize in your gut that there's nothing impartial about it. It's an annoying subterfuge, and your blood pressure may rise on hearing that word 'entertain' the next time.

Or, as Mr. Martin states more calmly, this should be a device for facilitating the conduct of business, not a would-be clever way for the chair to make motions when he's not supposed to.

[Tim Wynn]

RONR specifically allows the chair to exercise his right to make certain motions, such as to Object to the Consideration of a Question, or to raise a Point of Order.

As for the chair making assumptions, it can properly be done when the chair is accurately reading the parliamentary situation and the will of the assembly. It is the chair's job to aid the members with parliamentary forms, but he should never use this to promote his own purposes. Similarly, he should never abandon it to aid his own purposes. If a chair sees that a member wants to make a motion but doesn't know how, I'd say it's the chairs duty to inform the member of the proper procedure, without regard to his own position on the motion.

[Rob Elsman]

RONR specifically allows the chair to exercise his right to make certain motions, such as to Object to the Consideration of a Question, or to raise a Point of Order.

As for the chair making assumptions, it can properly be done when the chair is accurately reading the parliamentary situation and the will of the assembly. It is the chair's job to aid the members with parliamentary forms, but he should never use this to promote his own purposes. Similarly, he should never abandon it to aid his own purposes. If a chair sees that a member wants to make a motion but doesn't know how, I'd say it's the chairs duty to inform the member of the proper procedure, without regard to his own position on the motion.

As for the chair making assumptions, it can properly be done when the chair is accurately reading the parliamentary situation and the will of the assembly.

That's not what RONR, Off. Interp. 2007-1 actually says. Take another look at "Assuming a motion...pending business."

[Tim Wynn]

That's not what RONR, Off. Interp. 2007-1 actually says. Take another look at "Assuming a motion...pending business."

My post was about the chair making assumptions, which is a broader idea than just assuming motions. Official Interpretation 2007-1 gives some examples of a chair assuming a motion (which are examples of the chair reading the parliamentary situation), but a chair may also assume other things, like General Consent (which is an example of the chair reading the will of the assembly). See page 53, line 24-28.

[Rob Elsman]

My post was about the chair making assumptions, which is a broader idea than just assuming motions. Official Interpretation 2007-1 gives some examples of a chair assuming a motion (which are examples of the chair reading the parliamentary situation), but a chair may also assume other things, like General Consent (which is an example of the chair reading the will of the assembly). See page 53, line 24-28.

The original post asks whether the presiding officer can make motions (presumably outside a small board or committee). FAQ #1 answers the question nicely, and RONR 2007-1 covers those instances where the presiding officer can sometimes assume a motion has been made by just stating the question. All the other stuff has nothing to do with what the original poster is asking.

[Tim Wynn]

The original post asks whether the presiding officer can make motions (presumably outside a small board or committee). FAQ #1 answers the question nicely, and RONR 2007-1 covers those instances where the presiding officer can sometimes assume a motion has been made by just stating the question. All the other stuff has nothing to do with what the original poster is asking.

There I go, wandering outside the lines, again. Thanks for pulling me back.

[Guest Lee]

No. "The chair's ability to 'assume' a motion that has not actually been made by another member exists to facilitate the business of the assembly, not to give the chair an opportunity to make a motion whose consideration he or she, as an individual member, believes would be desirable." (RONR Off. Interp. 2007-1)

Keep in mind that Statement #2 does not apply in small boards or committees. In such settings, the chair participates the same as any other member. The device of "entertaining" a motion serves a similar purpose to the device of "assuming" a motion, and should again be used in order to facilitate the conduct of business, not to advance the consideration of a motion the chair personally supports. If the chair of a large assembly does intend to make a motion he personally supports, he should indeed relinquish the chair, and should not return to the chair until the pending main question has been disposed of. The chair should only follow this procedure rarely, when he believes that there is a matter of such urgency that his responsibility as a member outweighs his duties as chair. Overuse of this procedure may undermine the assembly's confidence in the chair's impartiality.

Thank you for this clarification, Josh.

That's not what RONR, Off. Interp. 2007-1 actually says. Take another look at "Assuming a motion...pending business."

Thank you for posting the link Rob Elsman; it was very helpful. Also, I appreciate every contributor posting to this topic-- thank you all. Concerning this matter, I believe I have a firm understanding. Be blessed.

Lee A. Wong