Abstention

[Guest Eagle45]

Newly elected School Board member. I am being asked to vote on a raise for the Superintendent. I was not part of the evaluation process that led to this raise. I believe abstaining from the vote is the proper thing to do. What does Roberts Rule say regarding this?

[Joshua Katz]

It says you are not required to vote, but doesn't suggest that voting would be improper.  If I recall correctly, I think it suggests that voting is fine and proper.  You're free not to vote if you wish, though (at least as far as RONR is concerned).

[George Mervosh]

It's totally up to you if you wish to abstain or not.  3 passages from RONR discuss abstentions:

"RIGHT OF ABSTENTION. Although it is the duty of every member who has an opinion on a question to express it by his vote, he can abstain, since he cannot be compelled to vote. By the same token, when an office or position is to be filled by a number of members, as in the case of a committee, or positions on a board, a member may partially abstain by voting for less than all of those for whom he is entitled to vote. 

ABSTAINING FROM VOTING ON A QUESTION OF DIRECT PERSONAL INTEREST. No member should vote on a question in which he has a direct personal or pecuniary interest not common to other members of the organization. For example, if a motion proposes that the organization enter into a contract with a commercial firm of which a member of the organization is an officer and from which contract he would derive personal pecuniary profit, the member should abstain from voting on the motion. However, no member can be compelled to refrain from voting in such circumstances. 

VOTING ON QUESTIONS AFFECTING ONESELF. The rule on abstaining from voting on a question of direct personal interest does not mean that a member should not vote for himself for an office or other position to which  members generally are eligible, or should not vote when other members are included with him in a motion. If a member never voted on a question affecting himself, it would be impossible for a society to vote to hold a banquet, or for the majority to prevent a small minority from preferring charges against them and suspending or expelling them (61, 63).

RONR (11th ed.), pp. 407-408

[Guest Eagle45]

Thank you. Much appreciated.

 

 

 

[George Mervosh]

So what have you decided to do? 

[Guest Eagle45]

Not sure. It will not come up for vote for another month so I do have some time.

One other question if you will allow me - is there debate for tabling a motion?

[George Mervosh]

1 hour ago, Guest Eagle45 said:

Not sure. It will not come up for vote for another month so I do have some time.

One other question if you will allow me - is there debate for tabling a motion?

No, but the motion to Lay on the Table is not a proper motion if you're just wanting to delay this motion until the next meeting.  See http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#12 and FAQ#13 which immediately follows it.

Edited April 10, 2018 at 08:44 PM by George Mervosh

[Guest Eagle45]

Thank you. I moved to lay the question on the table until our next meeting on the grounds of not receiving the information we were to vote on until about 3.5 hours before the meeting. My motion failed to move forward due to lack of a second.

[jstackpo]

Next time use "Postpone" and maybe someone will be sufficiently impressed by your (newly learned) parliamentary language to second (or even vote for) your motion.

[George Mervosh]

10 minutes ago, jstackpo said:

Next time use "Postpone" and maybe someone will be sufficiently impressed by your (newly learned) parliamentary language to second (or even vote for) your motion.

Sadly, his fellow board members will probably be scratching their heads.  They should all view the FAQs