Naming the person in the minutes that seconded a motion?

[Guest PhxSt.PatricksDayParade]

Must the person that seconded a motion be named in the minutes?

[Guest Catherine H]

No, the seconder does not have to be named. A seconder is merely opening the ability for discussion on a mothion; they may be wither for or against the motion. This then becomes confusing, historically if the seconder is noted in the minutes and an assumption is made that the individual was 'for' the motion when they actually jsut wanted it open for discussion.

[Josh Martin]

Must the person that seconded a motion be named in the minutes?

No, unless the assembly orders it included by majority vote.

[Guest PhxSt.PatricksDayParade]

No, unless the assembly orders it included by majority vote.

Thank you very much.

[Guest PhxSt.PatricksDayParade]

No, the seconder does not have to be named. A seconder is merely opening the ability for discussion on a mothion; they may be wither for or against the motion. This then becomes confusing, historically if the seconder is noted in the minutes and an assumption is made that the individual was 'for' the motion when they actually jsut wanted it open for discussion.

Thank you very much.

[Guest bridgetramp]

Must the person that seconded a motion be named in the minutes?

[Guest bridgetramp]

re seconder not being required in the minutes............does that mean the person making the initial motions must always be in the minutes?

[Trina]

re seconder not being required in the minutes............does that mean the person making the initial motions must always be in the minutes?

Yes. (RONR p. 452 ll. 18-19) on the content of the minutes -- 'giving, in the case of all important motions, the name of the mover...'