Support/No Support

[Guest Kathi]

At a recent meeting, an action item was presented, motioned, and supported. Upon voting it was a split vote, so a roll call vote was called for. During the roll call vote, the person that supported the motion changed his mind and voted “nay”. The vote ended up being 4-3 and passed At the time it wasn’t caught that the “supporter” voted Nay. What happens to the motion?

Was his support enough to bring it to vote level and then it’s okay if he voted against it?

Kathi

[jstackpo]

You seem to have a special rule about "support", or is that just what RONR calls "seconding" a motion?

If so, then there was nothing wrong - someone can legitimately second a motion because he thinks the association should go on record as defeating the motion. So he will vote "no" even though he seconded it.

Or maybe he did favor the motion in the beginning, but then changed his mind after hearing the debate.

[Rev Ed]

Neither the person who moved the motion, nor the person who seconds ("supports") the motion can be compelled to vote in favour of the motion. It is that plain and simple according to RONR.

[David A Foulkes]

At a recent meeting, an action item was presented, motioned, and supported. Upon voting it was a split vote, so a roll call vote was called for. During the roll call vote, the person that supported the motion changed his mind and voted “nay”. The vote ended up being 4-3 and passed At the time it wasn’t caught that the “supporter” voted Nay. What happens to the motion?

Was his support enough to bring it to vote level and then it’s okay if he voted against it?

Kathi

What do you mean it was a "split vote"? Do you mean it was a tie vote? With a final vote of 4-3 it seems as though the first vote should have either passed or failed unless someone abstained during the roll-call vote.

[Guest Kathi]

What do you mean it was a "split vote"? Do you mean it was a tie vote? With a final vote of 4-3 it seems as though the first vote should have either passed or failed unless someone abstained during the roll-call vote.

It was originally 5-2, then when a roll call vote was requested to clarify the vote, the person that seconded the motion changed his mind and voted Nay, which left the vote 4-3. I just wanted to clarify it was a legal vote, which from a previous poster's comments it was because a person can second a motion but in turn vote against it.

[Bruce Lages]

It was originally 5-2, then when a roll call vote was requested to clarify the vote...

I think this raises an interesting question. I don't see how a roll call vote could further clarify a 5-2 vote with only seven people voting. Is there a fundamental right to move to retake the vote by roll call, or, in this case, could the motion for a roll call vote be considered as dilatory?

[David A Foulkes]

I think this raises an interesting question. I don't see how a roll call vote could further clarify a 5-2 vote with only seven people voting. Is there a fundamental right to move to retake the vote by roll call, or, in this case, could the motion for a roll call vote be considered as dilatory?

Well, dilatory or not, I'd say it was inappropriate and unnecessary. The 5-2 vote seems like it should have been fine. Why the chair allowed for a roll call vote is a question.

The calling for a raised-hand or rising vote after a doubtful voice vote is one thing. I'm not sure how the poster knows it was 5-2 (unless she has extra-fine hearing) except that it must have been counted, and I'm not sure that was appropriate or necessary either, but not knowing the circumstances of this organization, their bylaws, or the motion, who can tell?

A roll call vote is usually used in legislative assemblies, and in meetings of local societies with large memberships but small attendance is generally dilatory.

Either way, the motion passed.

[Gary Novosielski]

At a recent meeting, an action item was presented, motioned, and supported. Upon voting it was a split vote, so a roll call vote was called for. During the roll call vote, the person that supported the motion changed his mind and voted “nay”. The vote ended up being 4-3 and passed At the time it wasn’t caught that the “supporter” voted Nay. What happens to the motion?

Was his support enough to bring it to vote level and then it’s okay if he voted against it?

Kathi

Your rules don't seem to correspond to normal procedure. But let's say you had motion and it came to a vote. Okay.

Now what do you mean by "it was a split vote"? How many votes were Yes, and How many were No? If there were more Yes than No votes, the motion passed. If not, i.e., the number of Yes votes was less than or equal to the number of No votes, then the motion failed.

In either case, taking another vote by roll-call was improper.

[David A Foulkes]

Now what do you mean by "it was a split vote"? How many votes were Yes, and How many were No?

Umm.... posts 4 & 5??

[Josh Martin]

What happens to the motion?

The motion is adopted.

Was his support enough to bring it to vote level and then it’s okay if he voted against it?

Yes and yes. The seconder may vote against the motion, even if the word "support" is used in place of "second."

It was originally 5-2, then when a roll call vote was requested to clarify the vote, the person that seconded the motion changed his mind and voted Nay, which left the vote 4-3. I just wanted to clarify it was a legal vote, which from a previous poster's comments it was because a person can second a motion but in turn vote against it.

It is a legal vote, however, a roll call vote is not the appropriate method of verifying a vote (although it doesn't seem the original vote was that doubtful if you had an exact count). The proper method of verifying a vote when the result is in doubt is a rising vote (counted if necessary) with a show of hands vote (counted if necessary) serving as an acceptable alternative in small assemblies. The purpose of a roll call vote is to put the votes of members on record in an assembly which is responsible to an interested constituency. Unless the assembly's rules provide otherwise, a majority vote without debate is required to order a roll call vote.

Is there a fundamental right to move to retake the vote by roll call

No.

or, in this case, could the motion for a roll call vote be considered as dilatory?

It certainly seems dilatory based on the facts provided. A roll call vote is not used to verify a vote, and it is unclear whether the assembly is responsible to an interested constituency.

Why the chair allowed for a roll call vote is a question.

It is likely a long-standing misconception. Based on what I've seen on this forum, the belief that a roll call vote is used to verify a vote or that one member can demand a roll call vote is fairly common.

I'm not sure how the poster knows it was 5-2 (unless she has extra-fine hearing) except that it must have been counted, and I'm not sure that was appropriate or necessary either, but not knowing the circumstances of this organization, their bylaws, or the motion, who can tell?

In small assemblies, it is acceptable to use an uncounted show of hands vote to take the initial vote, rather than a voice vote. It is likely that in such a small assembly, a member could conduct a quick informal count of the vote.

Now what do you mean by "it was a split vote"?

Based upon the subsequent post, it seems that a member called a Division of the Assembly (although I can't imagine why), and the members were under the belief that a roll call vote is the proper method to resolve this.

How many votes were Yes, and How many were No?

In the initial vote, five and two, respectively.

In either case, taking another vote by roll-call was improper.

Well, it was improper to retake the motion by roll call for the purpose of verifying the vote. If the assembly was responsible to an interested constituency, however, it would be in order to move that the vote be retaken by roll call for the purpose of forcing the members to go on record.