Public Voting

[Guest jonny]

Is there any way to make the vote be public, rather than by secret ballot?

[Robert B Fish]

The assembly may order any style of voting it feels best serves the situation. Move that the vote be taken by roll call. Majority vote required for approval.

-Bob

[Guest jonny]

The assembly may order any style of voting it feels best serves the situation. Move that the vote be taken by roll call. Majority vote required for approval.

-Bob

Thanks, Bob. Do you happen to have the authority on that? Do you know where in Robert's Rules of Order is that found?

[George Mervosh]

Is there any way to make the vote be public, rather than by secret ballot?

If your rules call for a secret ballot in a certain circumstance, no. otherwise, I agree with Bob.

[David A Foulkes]

Thanks, Bob. Do you happen to have the authority on that? Do you know where in Robert's Rules of Order is that found?

See Section 30, page 273, and also the section on Roll-Call Vote on page 405 for more information.

[Gary Novosielski]

Is there any way to make the vote be public, rather than by secret ballot?

Well, in general yes, but it certainly might depend upon just what "the vote" is that you're referring to.

Is this an election? Do your bylaws require "the vote" to be a ballot vote? You say "rather than by secret ballot" as though that would be the usual way of taking "the vote". If so, there's usually a reason.

Why not fill us in on the entire scenario, before we start guessing. (That's never pretty.)

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Is there any way to make the vote be public,

rather than by secret ballot?

"Public"?

Do you mean, by voice, by hands, by rising, by roll call?

It depends.

Q. What makes you think that the vote will be automatically done via secret ballot? Is there a rule already in place?

If there is a rule in place, then the answer is "No."

The secrecy of a secret ballot cannot be overridden by a motion.

You would have to amend the controlling rule.

(Yet, see RONR for a rare possible method of accomplishing such an end. It is a bit of a duplication of effort, and a bit time-consuming, therefore. But nonetheless theoretically possible.)

[Gary Novosielski]

(Yet, see RONR for a rare possible method of accomplishing such an end. It is a bit of a duplication of effort, and a bit time-consuming, therefore. But nonetheless theoretically possible.)

Should I look under Methods, rare possible in the index?

[hmtcastle]

Should I look under Methods, rare possible in the index?

If you look there it says,

See Ends, accomplishing, time-consuming.

[Gary Novosielski]

If you look there it says,

See Ends, accomplishing, time-consuming.

Drat! That part of the index has fallen out of my copy of RONR 10.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Should I look under Methods, rare possible in the index?

Wrong citation.

See "Parliamentary Law", page 352.

[hmtcastle]

(Yet, see RONR for a rare possible method of accomplishing such an end. It is a bit of a duplication of effort, and a bit time-consuming, therefore. But nonetheless theoretically possible.)

Wrong citation.

See "Parliamentary Law", page 352.

Thanks for correcting the citation.

[Dan Honemann]

Thanks for correcting the citation.

I might assume that the reference to page 352 of PL is to the rule that a ballot vote must be taken on the demand of a single member in disciplinary proceedings on questions of guilt and punishment, but if so, why not refer to RONR pages 628 and 640 instead? Furthermore, since nothing of this "is a bit of a duplication of effort, and a bit time-consuming" or should be characterized as "nonetheless theoretically possible", my assumption would appear to be wrong.