irishpompom Posted August 9, 2011 at 08:17 PM Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 at 08:17 PM If a motion is made in the negative (I move to deny) and the vote is tied, the motion fails. It doesn't make sense that the opposing view (approval) would then automatically ensue. Is it appropriate to then require a motion to approve which would then fail through a tied vote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted August 9, 2011 at 08:21 PM Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 at 08:21 PM If a motion to deny fails, nothing requires an ensuing motion to approve, though I can't see why it would be out of order if someone made it.......and you have no idea how a vote on that motion might go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted August 9, 2011 at 10:00 PM Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 at 10:00 PM No. The assembly has decided not to "deny" whatever it was considering, but it has certainly not decided to approve it (or whatever the opposite may be).If the motion to deny something was simply a decision to do nothing, then it was out of order and shouldn't have been made at all since its adoption would have made no difference (I can't seem to find the citation on this one). If there was a real difference between explicitly "denying" and neither denying nor approving, and explicitly approving (I can certainly provide an instance of where this might be the case), then the motion was in order and the assembly has done nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted August 9, 2011 at 10:32 PM Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 at 10:32 PM I can't seem to find the citation on this oneBottom of page 99 (l. 33) over to 100, particularly line 18 forward (on p. 100). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted August 10, 2011 at 12:36 AM Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 12:36 AM If a motion is made in the negative (I move to deny) and the vote is tied, the motion fails. It doesn't make sense that the opposing view (approval) would then automatically ensue. Is it appropriate to then require a motion to approve which would then fail through a tied vote?A motion is a proposal to do something. Motions made in the negative should usually not be admitted in the first place, for that very reason. If the motion passes nothing is done; if the motion fails nothing is done. It is a dilatory motion and should be ruled out of order by the chair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted August 10, 2011 at 02:32 PM Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 02:32 PM A motion is a proposal to do something. Motions made in the negative should usually not be admitted in the first place, for that very reason. If the motion passes nothing is done; if the motion fails nothing is done. It is a dilatory motion and should be ruled out of order by the chair.What if the assembly is required to go on record denying whatever the request may be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted August 10, 2011 at 04:35 PM Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 04:35 PM What if the assembly is required to go on record denying whatever the request may be?Then the motion is in order since its adoption is different from doing nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:42 AM Report Share Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:42 AM What if the assembly is required to go on record denying whatever the request may be?Required? By whom? How? The response to a request is easily accomplished by a motion to grant the request, so that a Yes vote approves and a No vote fails to approve. A motion that fails is a decision by the assembly to leave the status quo untouched. So if a motion to deny a request fails, the request remains unapproved.(If my aunt had wheels, she'd be a teacart.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted August 11, 2011 at 04:33 AM Report Share Posted August 11, 2011 at 04:33 AM Required? By whom? How? The response to request is easily accomplished by a motion to grant the request, so that a Yes vote approves and a No vote fails to approve. A motion that fails is a decision by the assembly to leave the status quo untouched. So if a motion to deny a request fails, the request remains unapproved.(If my aunt had wheels, she'd be a teacart.)There may be situations where explicitly rejecting something is not the same as failing to approve it. As an example, one student organization of which I'm a member (my shameful secret is out) holds infrequent general meetings and has an elected council; the council is authorized to make bylaw amendments but those lose effect if they are not approved by the next regular general meeting and can be explicitly rejected by an earlier (and by necessity special) general meeting. If a special meeting were called and the bylaw amendment was not explicitly rejected, it would continue to have effect until the next regular general meeting at least.Whether or not this is the best system is up for debate, but the distinction certainly can exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 4atrsc Posted August 13, 2011 at 05:30 PM Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 at 05:30 PM Our club board is made up of eight districts, President, VP and Sec/Treas. We just had the elections for the even numbered districts and VP. District 8 vote was tied. The president, who resides within Dist 8, cast her vote for the director of the district. Because the president already voted, how do we break the tie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted August 13, 2011 at 05:42 PM Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 at 05:42 PM Our club board is made up of eight districts, President, VP and Sec/Treas. We just had the elections for the even numbered districts and VP. District 8 vote was tied. The president, who resides within Dist 8, cast her vote for the director of the district. Because the president already voted, how do we break the tie?Ties are not "broken". Ties are just a failure to achieve a majority (more than half) of the votes.So, a tie vote elects no one. You will need to hold a second ballot which gives people a chance to change their minds. When someone gets a majority (more votes than all other candidates for that office combined) they are elected. If not: rinse; repeat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 4ATRSC Posted August 13, 2011 at 06:57 PM Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 at 06:57 PM Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted August 17, 2011 at 01:44 AM Report Share Posted August 17, 2011 at 01:44 AM Required? By whom? How? The example that comes to mind for me is zoning boards, which are often required by law to either approve or deny an application.The response to a request is easily accomplished by a motion to grant the request, so that a Yes vote approves and a No vote fails to approve. A motion that fails is a decision by the assembly to leave the status quo untouched. So if a motion to deny a request fails, the request remains unapproved. Yes, that's how it works under RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.