Guest Edward Hilz Posted January 1, 2012 at 11:26 PM Report Share Posted January 1, 2012 at 11:26 PM Does Robert Rules permit voting by email on an issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 1, 2012 at 11:48 PM Report Share Posted January 1, 2012 at 11:48 PM No. You have to add it, via a proper amendment, to your bylaws. See p. 423.And be sure to think it through carefully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Goodwiller, PRP Posted January 2, 2012 at 12:57 AM Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 at 12:57 AM To be a bit more specific, Robert's Rules says (beginning on pg. 424, l. 4), "A vote by mail, when authorized in the bylaws, is generally reserved for important issues, such as an amendment to the bylaws or an election of officers - on which a full vote of the membership is desirable even though only a small fraction of the members normally attend meetings. . . If the vote is not to be secret, the following items should be sent to each qualified voter: 1) a printed ballot . . . 2) a specially recognizable, self-addressed return envelope . . . E-mail and other means of electronic communication can be tailored to comply with these requirements."The most important first ingredient is that such voting must be authorized in the organization's bylaws. What is also exceedingly important is that e-mail not be used as a means of debate - since it does not provide an opportunity for simultaneous, aural communication. Voting, yes. Debate prior to voting, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Britton Posted January 2, 2012 at 02:55 PM Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 at 02:55 PM Does Robert Rules permit voting by email on an issue?I am in agreement, Dr. Stackpole and Mr. Goodwiller's (Hi Greg) general answers on this query. However, there is a very specific exception to this rule when it involves a committee's report.This specifiec exception is found in RONR/11, page 503 (line 24)."In the the case of a committee, however, if it is impractical to bring its members together for a meeting, the report of the committee can contain what has been agreed to by every one of its members. ( See also Electronic Meetings, pp. 97-99.)" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 2, 2012 at 03:33 PM Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 at 03:33 PM Good reminder -- which (of course!) brings up the question: "Who decides whether it is 'impractical' or not?"Can't be the committee, "deciding" by e-(or p-)mail, as that confuses carts and horses.That leaves the association (or the Board) to do so; but if they neglect to ... ?Moral: NEVER use the passive voice in laying our rules (in bylaws, particularly). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Britton Posted January 2, 2012 at 04:11 PM Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 at 04:11 PM It's important to remember that a standing or special committee in an organization is a Subordinate Body, and not necessarily a Deliberative Assembly. If the entire membership of the committee is in agreement with the contents of a written report, and is willing to express that agreement in an email (written consent), is there actually anything left to deliberate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 4, 2012 at 01:38 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 01:38 AM Good reminder -- which (of course!) brings up the question: "Who decides whether it is 'impractical' or not?"Can't be the committee, "deciding" by e-(or p-)mail, as that confuses carts and horses.That leaves the association (or the Board) to do so; but if they neglect to ... ?Moral: NEVER use the passive voice in laying our rules (in bylaws, particularly).Why wouldn't it be the committee? If the committee doesn't have time to meet, the parent assembly certainly doesn't have time to do so. Furthermore, since this procedure requires the unanimous agreement of all the members of the committee, I don't think abuse of this rule is really a concern. Lastly, if the assembly felt that the committee had not done its due diligence on the issue, it has its chance to deal with that when the report is submitted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:06 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:06 AM I suppose, if the entire committtee agreed it was "impractical" to meet, that would be OK.But what's to prevent (other than one member) the committee members from (all) deciding it is "impractical" to meet even if they all live in the same condo comlex, say, but just don't want to go out nights. Sort of skirts the rule. I still wish to campaign against the passive voice in rules of any kind. If there is a decision to be made, I want to know who makes the decision, unambiguously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:12 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:12 AM But what's to prevent (other than one member) the committee members from (all) deciding it is "impractical" to meet even if they all live in the same condo comlex, say, but just don't want to go out nights. Sort of skirts the rule.If a committee takes such an action, and the society feels it is desirable to have the committee meet to fully deliberate the issue, it is free to recommit the motion - with explicit instructions that the committee must have an in-person meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:16 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:16 AM And if the committee members all agree that it is (still) "impractical" to meet in person...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Britton Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:57 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:57 AM What I find interesting is the following statement found in the 10th edition, and is ommitted in the 11th:"If a committee is appointed from different sections of the country with the expectation that its work will be done by corresponse, its report can contain what is agreed to by a majority of its members." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 4, 2012 at 03:04 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 03:04 AM And if the committee members all agree that it is (still) "impractical" to meet in person...?As in any case when a committee refuses to follow the instructions of the parent assembly, the appropriate course of action would be to replace the committee members with people who know who the boss is. What I find interesting is the following statement found in the 10th edition, and is ommitted in the 11th:"If a committee is appointed from different sections of the country with the expectation that its work will be done by corresponse, its report can contain can contain what is agreed to by a majority of its members."What is it that you find interesting - the statement itself, or the fact that it was omitted from the 11th edition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Britton Posted January 4, 2012 at 03:10 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 03:10 AM That it was omitted. However, as the technology changes, I'm really not surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 4, 2012 at 03:17 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 03:17 AM That it was omitted. However, as the technology changes, I'm really not surprised.Oh, okay. Well, it seems you have guessed at the reasoning for the change (or recall it from the presentation by some of the members of the authorship team at the NAP Convention) - the theory is that electronic meetings (authorized by the parent body) replace the correspondence mentioned in that citation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 4, 2012 at 03:24 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 03:24 AM As in any case when a committee refuses to follow the instructions of the parent assembly, the appropriate course of action would be to replace the committee members with people who know who the boss is. And by what authority does the parent organization get to tell the committee HOW (physically) to meet? The committee members are (obviously) the best qualified foks to decide if in-person meetings are "impractical".But enough of this - it is sufficiently passive-aggressive to keep us up all night.Happy New Year! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 4, 2012 at 03:28 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 03:28 AM And by what authority does the parent organization get to tell the committee HOW (physically) to meet? The committee members are (obviously) the best qualified foks to decide if in-person meetings are "impractical".Well, if I knew you were going to carry on both sides of the argument yourself I would have kept quiet. In seriousness, though, a parent organization is free to give instructions to a subordinate committee, including how the committee is to meet, although I agree that the committee members are generally the best qualified to decide if an in-person meeting is impractical. Additionally, I have simply been trying to interpret the rule as it is written. I am in full agreement that the passive voice is generally undesirable when writing rules.Also, a happy new year to you as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted August 2, 2012 at 11:07 PM Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 at 11:07 PM I am in agreement, Dr. Stackpole and Mr. Goodwiller's (Hi Greg) general answers on this query. However, there is a very specific exception to this rule when it involves a committee's report.This specifiec exception is found in RONR/11, page 503 (line 24)."In the the case of a committee, however, if it is impractical to bring its members together for a meeting, the report of the committee can contain what has been agreed to by every one of its members. ( See also Electronic Meetings, pp. 97-99.)"Good reminder -- which (of course!) brings up the question: "Who decides whether it is 'impractical' or not?"Can't be the committee, "deciding" by e-(or p-)mail, as that confuses carts and horses.That leaves the association (or the Board) to do so; but if they neglect to ... ?Moral: NEVER use the passive voice in laying our rules (in bylaws, particularly).(Entering this conversation just a little late ...)The only passive voice in the quoted sentence is "has been agreed to," and that represents no ambiguity at all, because "by every one of its members" immediately follows.Happy new year! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.