Guest SMckamey Posted July 11, 2011 at 09:40 PM Report Share Posted July 11, 2011 at 09:40 PM A resolution was adopted by our township board members with (3) in favor and (2) obstained. It passed. Time passed and some other issues evolved and it was proposed by board members to rescind the resolution. We were told by the polititarin that we need 3 1/4 votes to rescind. All five were allowed to vote even though they obstained in the first vote due to conflict of interest. Does it take (4) votes to rescind a resolution as we were told. The board voted and again (3) voted in favor of rescinding the resolution. The other (2) voted against rescinding the resolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted July 11, 2011 at 09:50 PM Report Share Posted July 11, 2011 at 09:50 PM A resolution was adopted by our township board members with (3) in favor and (2) obstained. It passed. Time passed and some other issues evolved and it was proposed by board members to rescind the resolution. We were told by the polititarin that we need 3 1/4 votes to rescind. All five were allowed to vote even though they obstained in the first vote due to conflict of interest. Does it take (4) votes to rescind a resolution as we were told. The board voted and again (3) voted in favor of rescinding the resolution. The other (2) voted against rescinding the resolution.If there are only 5 members on the Board the motion was adopted (by a majority of the ENTIRE membership of the Board). A majority vote is required if previous notice was given that a motion to Rescind will be given. If previous notice was not given a 2/3 vote OR a majority of the ENTIRE membership (of the Board) is required (RONR p. 295). Of course, this is assuming that whatever the resolution is proposing to do has not been fully executed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SMckamey Posted July 11, 2011 at 09:56 PM Report Share Posted July 11, 2011 at 09:56 PM Thank you for your quick response.Three out of (5) members voted to rescind this resolution. It was a purchase of property. But because the polititarian said that it took (4) people to rescind; it was not rescinded and therefore the property was purchased which created quite a stir in our community and some questions as to the legality of it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted July 11, 2011 at 10:26 PM Report Share Posted July 11, 2011 at 10:26 PM Thank you for your quick response.Three out of (5) members voted to rescind this resolution. It was a purchase of property. But because the polititarian said that it took (4) people to rescind; it was not rescinded and therefore the property was purchased which created quite a stir in our community and some questions as to the legality of it all.Well the "polititarian" (whatever the heck that is) is incorrect if the Board uses Robert's Rules of Order and you all didn't adopt any conflicting rules regarding what sort of vote is required to Rescind something. However, since no one (presumably) objected to the declaration that the motion failed it is too late to object now (RONR pp. 243-244). Also, since you are now bringing up that property is involved that brings a whole new wrinkle to the situation since there would likely be contracts, agents, money changing hands, and who knows what else which brings this into the legal realm as well. As to whether the property purchase was "legal" is a question to direct to a lawyer who can advise you all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted July 11, 2011 at 11:05 PM Report Share Posted July 11, 2011 at 11:05 PM Three out of (5) members voted to rescind this resolution. It was a purchase of property. But because the polititarian said that it took (4) people to rescind; it was not rescinded and therefore the property was purchased which created quite a stir in our community and some questions as to the legality of it all.It seems that your parliamentarian is overlooking the fact that a motion can be rescinded by a vote of a majority of the entire membership (of the board), not to mention that he should take another look at his math. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SMckamey Posted July 13, 2011 at 08:49 PM Report Share Posted July 13, 2011 at 08:49 PM Well the "polititarian" (whatever the heck that is) is incorrect if the Board uses Robert's Rules of Order and you all didn't adopt any conflicting rules regarding what sort of vote is required to Rescind something. However, since no one (presumably) objected to the declaration that the motion failed it is too late to object now (RONR pp. 243-244). Also, since you are now bringing up that property is involved that brings a whole new wrinkle to the situation since there would likely be contracts, agents, money changing hands, and who knows what else which brings this into the legal realm as well. As to whether the property purchase was "legal" is a question to direct to a lawyer who can advise you all.Chris - again thank you for your response. We actually did object to this being done in the audience and three of the five members of the board objected to it yet they still proceeded with purchasing the property. We could not believe what was going down. Where we failed as citizens was not contacting an authority (meaning prosecutor) at the time this went down. But it may not be too late to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SMckamey Posted July 13, 2011 at 08:55 PM Report Share Posted July 13, 2011 at 08:55 PM Our parliamentarian quoted Roberts Rules of Order stating that if it involved money, the board would have to have 67% of the vote to rescind the Resolution. The board had 3 out of 5 that voted to rescind but they still moved forward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted July 13, 2011 at 09:03 PM Report Share Posted July 13, 2011 at 09:03 PM Our parliamentarian quoted Roberts Rules of Order stating that if it involved money, the board would have to have 67% of the vote to rescind the Resolution. The board had 3 out of 5 that voted to rescind but they still moved forwardRobert's Rules contains no such provision concerning the involvement of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted July 13, 2011 at 09:13 PM Report Share Posted July 13, 2011 at 09:13 PM We actually did object to this being done in the audience and three of the five members of the board objected to it yet they still proceeded with purchasing the property. Well, those in the audience (I am assuming they are not Board members) have no rights (under RONR) to object to what was happening but the Board members should have Appealed any adverse ruling that the motion to Rescind was defeated. But you all should look into if there are any legal options available to remedy the situation.Our parliamentarian quoted Roberts Rules of Order stating that if it involved money, the board would have to have 67% of the vote to rescind the Resolution. Well, while a 2/3 vote (which is NOT the same thing as 67%) is one option to adopt a motion to Rescind when previous notice wasn't given but another option is a majority of the entire membership of the Board which a 3-2 vote would accomplish. Also, there is nothing in RONR that makes the voting threshold different just because money is involved (though the Board rules may). Me thinks that the Board needs a new parliamentarian who has a copy of the 10th Edition of Robert's Rules of Order (the most current one although the 11th will be coming out in a few months) and knows how to read it.The board had 3 out of 5 that voted to rescind but they still moved forwardWell, whoever "they" are were incorrect as far as RONR is concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 14, 2011 at 03:05 AM Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 at 03:05 AM We actually did object to this being done in the audience and three of the five members of the board objected to it yet they still proceeded with purchasing the property. We could not believe what was going down. Where we failed as citizens was not contacting an authority (meaning prosecutor) at the time this went down. But it may not be too late to do so.Well, a board member should have raised an Appeal from the decision of the chair. At this point, I think you will indeed need legal help, since contracts are involved.Our parliamentarian quoted Roberts Rules of Order stating that if it involved money, the board would have to have 67% of the vote to rescind the Resolution.RONR says no such thing. I don't know what he was quoting, but it was not Robert's Rules of Order. His math is flawed as well - you said he stated that 3 1/4 votes were needed, and that is less than 67% of 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted July 14, 2011 at 05:18 AM Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 at 05:18 AM A couple other points that I don't think were addressed, although I may be overlooking them by now.1. Nothing in Robert's Rules requires anyone with a conflict of interest to abstain. In fact the term "conflict of interest" does not even appear in the book. (Your township might have overriding rules, you would have to look into that.)2. With rare exceptions, just plain nothing in Robert's Rules, nothing remotely, would let anyone or anything prevent any member from voting. Ever. Especially if they just had abstained at an earlier time, which is anyone's right.3. Mr Martin did already said it, but it keeps me up nights (at least this one), so I emphasize: the majority should have appealed the chair's decision. And maybe just plain bounced the chairman out of the chair (see Official Interpretation # 2006-2, "SUSPEND THE RULES TO REMOVE PRESIDENT," at http://www.robertsrules.com/interp_list.html#2006_2 .) And look at the Oklahoma Script to see how the fireworks can go. Especially when the chairman and the polititarin (he's obviously no parliamentarian!) went and let a minority throw away your money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.