Reconsideration of vote to include absent member

[Guest quirkyclerk]

Can a legislative body reconsider legislation that was adopted in order to allow a member who was absent for the first vote to vote on the measure?

[Tim Wynn]

Can a legislative body reconsider legislation that was adopted in order to allow a member who was absent for the first vote to vote on the measure?

According to RONR, the motion to reconsider has very limiting time constraints on its use. It cannot be moved at a different session than the one in which the vote took place. Also, it can only be moved by someone who voted on the prevailing side. So, even if you're within the time window, it would be pointless for someone who voted for the motion to reconsider the vote on it, unless that person wanted to change the result of the vote.

The purpose of the motion to Reconsider is "to permit correction of hasty, ill-advised, or erroneous action, or to take into account added information or a changed situation that has developed since the taking of the vote."

Reconsidering a vote just for the purpose of including an additional member's vote seems dilatory to me.

Note that a legislative body is likely to have custom rules that take precedence over the rules in RONR.

By the way, if the motion was lost on the first vote, the motion could simply be renewed at the next session.

[David A Foulkes]

Can a legislative body reconsider legislation that was adopted in order to allow a member who was absent for the first vote to vote on the measure?

It would seem the only purposes to do this would be A.) allow the member's vote to be recorded, assuming a roll-call vote, or B.) if the motion passed by a margin where one more vote in the negative would alter the result. As it's unclear whether either applies here, more information would be needed to answer. Since it's too late to Reconsider, it might be possible to Rescind, although with your terminology (legislative body, legislation) I'm not sure what is applicable. I'll leave that to others to follow up here.

By the way, if the motion was lost on the first vote, the motion could simply be renewed at the next session.

Well, the motion was adopted as noted above. The "first vote" quirckyclerk refers to is the adopting vote, with the implication that a second vote be taken to allow the absentee to vote.

[Guest quirkyclerk]

Here is the exact situation. We adopted legislation by a 4 yeas, 2 nays, one absent vote. In order for the emergency clause causing the legislation to be adopted immediately, we needed 5 affirmative votes. Without the adoption of the emergency clause, it will take 30 days for the legislation to go into effect. The purpose for the reconsideration is to have this absent person be able to vote yes, thus activating the emergency clause in the legisation. I need to know if this can be done.

[Tim Wynn]

Here is the exact situation. We adopted legislation by a 4 yeas, 2 nays, one absent vote. In order for the emergency clause causing the legislation to be adopted immediately, we needed 5 affirmative votes. Without the adoption of the emergency clause, it will take 30 days for the legislation to go into effect. The purpose for the reconsideration is to have this absent person be able to vote yes, thus activating the emergency clause in the legisation. I need to know if this can be done.

This "emergency-clause" rule is the governing factor (and I assume it's not wholly contained in the legislation you just adopted, since that would allow you to simply amend it). Since no one on this forum is familiar with your specific rule, we can't offer much insight into your specific case.

Reconsider cannot be moved on a vote from a previous session. See RONR(10th ed.), p. 293, l. 31, for a motion that may be applicable.

[Guest quirkyclerk]

The emergency clause language is contained in the legislation but the necessary 2/3 (5) affirmative votes is Ohio law and cannot be amended. What has actually occurred is that the legislation passes by a 4 yea, two nay, one absent vote. It takes 5 affiramtive votes for the emergency clause to be enacted and allow the legislation to become effective immediately; otherwise it takes 30 days before it takes effect. What the affirmative voters want is to reconsider the vote to include the absent member and thereby obtain the necessary 2/3 votes for immediate adoption. I know that a motion to reconsider must be made on the same day the vote to be reconsidered is taken or on the next succeeding day within the session on which a business meeting is held. Since this is a City Council Meeting, it has alway been interpreted that a "session" is a term of council (2 years) and that the motion to reconsider must be made no later than the next regularly scheduled meeting (every two weeks). This request would fall into that timeframe. What I need to know is can this motion be reconsidered in order to change the effective date of the legislation. In this particular case, the effective date makes a substantial difference. Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated.

[Tim Wynn]

The emergency clause language is contained in the legislation but the necessary 2/3 (5) affirmative votes is Ohio law and cannot be amended. What has actually occurred is that the legislation passes by a 4 yea, two nay, one absent vote. It takes 5 affiramtive votes for the emergency clause to be enacted and allow the legislation to become effective immediately; otherwise it takes 30 days before it takes effect. What the affirmative voters want is to reconsider the vote to include the absent member and thereby obtain the necessary 2/3 votes for immediate adoption. I know that a motion to reconsider must be made on the same day the vote to be reconsidered is taken or on the next succeeding day within the session on which a business meeting is held. Since this is a City Council Meeting, it has alway been interpreted that a "session" is a term of council (2 years) and that the motion to reconsider must be made no later than the next regularly scheduled meeting (every two weeks). This request would fall into that timeframe. What I need to know is can this motion be reconsidered in order to change the effective date of the legislation. In this particular case, the effective date makes a substantial difference. Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated.

The wording of that Ohio law is essential, here. The problem is that we don't handle laws, here. Legal questions should be directed to an attorney [cringe].

Just as a note, a vote of 4-2, 1 abstaining, is a two-thirds vote, but it's quite possible that the law calls for a higher threshold than a two-thirds vote (such as two thirds of the entire membership.) See RONR(10th ed.), p. 387 - 393.

[Chris Harrison]

The emergency clause language is contained in the legislation but the necessary 2/3 (5) affirmative votes is Ohio law and cannot be amended. What has actually occurred is that the legislation passes by a 4 yea, two nay, one absent vote. It takes 5 affiramtive votes for the emergency clause to be enacted and allow the legislation to become effective immediately; otherwise it takes 30 days before it takes effect. What the affirmative voters want is to reconsider the vote to include the absent member and thereby obtain the necessary 2/3 votes for immediate adoption. I know that a motion to reconsider must be made on the same day the vote to be reconsidered is taken or on the next succeeding day within the session on which a business meeting is held. Since this is a City Council Meeting, it has alway been interpreted that a "session" is a term of council (2 years) and that the motion to reconsider must be made no later than the next regularly scheduled meeting (every two weeks). This request would fall into that timeframe. What I need to know is can this motion be reconsidered in order to change the effective date of the legislation. In this particular case, the effective date makes a substantial difference. Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated.

If it falls within the time frame as spelled out by RONR than it can be Reconsidered. However, since you are a legislative body there very likely are rules (outside of RONR) which would influence what exactly can be done using Reconsideration. So without us having all of the relevant details (which would be going beyond the scope of this forum) we can't tell you for sure. You will need to look to your own rules.

[Guest quirkyclerk]

The wording of that Ohio law is essential, here. The problem is that we don't handle laws, here. Legal questions should be directed to an attorney [cringe].

Just as a note, a vote of 4-2, 1 abstaining, is a two-thirds vote, but it's quite possible that the law calls for a higher threshold than a two-thirds vote (such as two thirds of the entire membership.) See RONR(10th ed.), p. 387 - 393.

Yes, it must be two thirds of those members ELECTED to Counci, not those present. Thanks.

[Gary Novosielski]

Yes, it must be two thirds of those members ELECTED to Counci, not those present. Thanks.

Another problem is that IF it is subject to reconsideration, the motion to reconsider must be moved by someone who voted on the prevailing side. Since the motion was lost, the prevailing side is the negative side.

You would need to get one of those two people who voted against it to move to reconsider it.

Is that likely to happen?

[Tim Wynn]

Another problem is that IF it is subject to reconsideration, the motion to reconsider must be moved by someone who voted on the prevailing side. Since the motion was lost, the prevailing side is the negative side.

You would need to get one of those two people who voted against it to move to reconsider it.

Is that likely to happen?

Actually, from my understanding, it was adopted, Gary.

[Josh Martin]

Since this is a City Council Meeting, it has alway been interpreted that a "session" is a term of council (2 years) and that the motion to reconsider must be made no later than the next regularly scheduled meeting (every two weeks). This request would fall into that timeframe. What I need to know is can this motion be reconsidered in order to change the effective date of the legislation. In this particular case, the effective date makes a substantial difference.

If your rules provide that the motion to Reconsider is still in order, then there is no problem with this strategy from a parliamentary perspective. I have no idea whether this strategy would be kosher with Ohio law. I would advise consulting an attorney on that point.

Another problem is that IF it is subject to reconsideration, the motion to reconsider must be moved by someone who voted on the prevailing side. Since the motion was lost, the prevailing side is the negative side.

You would need to get one of those two people who voted against it to move to reconsider it.

Is that likely to happen?

The motion was adopted, however, since it did not meet the higher voting threshold for "emergency action," there is a 30 day waiting period before it takes effect. Ultimately, I think this is a legal issue, not a parliamentary one.