Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Chair of a meeting voting powers


Guest Robbie Niquanicappo

Recommended Posts

Guest Robbie Niquanicappo

I have seen many instances of the terms of reference of a committee say; "The Chair of the committee shall cast a second tie breaking vote." or "The Chair shall cast a second tie breaking vote." When the Chair of the committee is not chairing the meeting, who gets the tie breaking vote? The Chair of the committee, or the chair of the meeting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Guest Robbie Niquanicappo said:

I have seen many instances of the terms of reference of a committee say; "The Chair of the committee shall cast a second tie breaking vote." or "The Chair shall cast a second tie breaking vote." When the Chair of the committee is not chairing the meeting, who gets the tie breaking vote? The Chair of the committee, or the chair of the meeting?

Your organization will need to interpret its own rules. Nothing in RONR permits the chairman to cast two votes.

For what it is worth, the rule in RONR is that the chairman shall not vote unless his vote would affect the result or the vote is taken by ballot, and by "chairman" I mean the person who is chairing the meeting at the time. In committees and small boards, however, this rule does not apply, and the chair is free to vote in all cases. Under no circumstances may the chair vote twice. If there is a tie, the motion is defeated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Josh Martin said:

For what it is worth, the rule in RONR is that the chairman shall not vote unless his vote would affect the result or the vote is taken by ballot, and by "chairman" I mean the person who is chairing the meeting at the time. In committees and small boards, however, this rule does not apply, and the chair is free to vote in all cases. Under no circumstances may the chair vote twice. If there is a tie, the motion is defeated.

Agreeing with Mr. Martin, it is also true that many organizations (and chairs, oddly enough...) misinterpret this rule to allow the chair to vote twice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Ok, let's revise my original question.

Example:

"The Chair of the committee shall cast a tie breaking vote."

VS

"The Chair shall cast a second tie breaking vote."

When the Chair of the committee is not chairing the meeting, who gets the tie breaking vote? The Chair of the committee, or the chair of the meeting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoever is the presiding officer  --  i.e., the "chair"  --  is the one who should not vote other than to break OR MAKE a tie, thus causing the motion to be defeated by a tie.  And he/she is not required to do so in any event.

Do your bylaws really say "shall" thus making it a requirement to vote? Not a good bylaw.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Robbie Niquanicappo said:

Ok, let's revise my original question.

Example:

"The Chair of the committee shall cast a tie breaking vote."

VS

"The Chair shall cast a second tie breaking vote."

When the Chair of the committee is not chairing the meeting, who gets the tie breaking vote? The Chair of the committee, or the chair of the meeting?

The rule in RONR which provides that the chairman shall vote only if his vote would affect the result or if the vote is taken by ballot applies to whoever is presiding at the time. This rule does not apply in committees. The chair is free to vote in all cases in meetings of a committee. If a vote is tied, the motion fails. There is no tie-breaking vote.

Your organization appears to have its own rules on this subject, and it is up to your organization to interpret its own rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but this looks like an easy one.  If the bylaws grant the "chair of the committee" an extra vote to "break a tie," then I see no reason that should transfer to the presiding officer, any more than the right to appoint committees transfers from the President to the presiding officer when the bylaws say "the President shall appoint all committees."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, thanks to all for replying. I asked this question because I have seen it often. I am currently revising bylaws and meeting procedures for the organization I work for. They were written by my predecessor and I decided to post my question here since you guys seem to know what's what. My question topic is the only thing I have found so far that gave me pause. Again, Thanks.

P.S. Thanks to jstackpo for the tip about "shall".

Edited by Robbie Niquanicappo
Forgot the p.s.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Joshua Katz said:

Yes, but this looks like an easy one.  If the bylaws grant the "chair of the committee" an extra vote to "break a tie," then I see no reason that should transfer to the presiding officer, any more than the right to appoint committees transfers from the President to the presiding officer when the bylaws say "the President shall appoint all committees."

Yes, but the difference is that the term "President" quite clearly refers to the President. The term "chair" however, when used in the context of a meeting, is ambiguous. It might refer to the regular presiding officer, or it might refer to the  current presiding officer.

Try changing the wording in your analogous example to "the Chair shall appoint all committees" and see if you think this is still an easy question. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...