Guest Mary Whigham Posted February 24, 2012 at 09:35 PM Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 at 09:35 PM I have read and reread "in the usual situation, where either a majority vote or a two-thirds vote is required, abstentions have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the vote since what is required is either a majority or two thirds of the votes cast. On the other hand, it the vote required is a majority or two thirds of the members present, or a majority or two thirds of the entire membership, an abstention will have the same effect as a "No" vote....trying to understand the difference. If a vote to approve the budget is called for (and our bylaws only require a simple majority) at a scheduled meeting and the vote is 30 for, 32 against and 30 abstentions, I presume the vote fails....you do not take into account the total number of votes, i.e. 92 and decide that 32 is not a majority of 92...or the 30 abstentions become a no vote and 62 is a majority of 92. Obviously I am confused as to when the abstentions become a no vote....HELP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 24, 2012 at 09:39 PM Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 at 09:39 PM I have read and reread "in the usual situation, where either a majority vote or a two-thirds vote is required, abstentions have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the vote since what is required is either a majority or two thirds of the votes cast. On the other hand, it the vote required is a majority or two thirds of the members present, or a majority or two thirds of the entire membership, an abstention will have the same effect as a "No" vote....trying to understand the difference. If a vote to approve the budget is called for (and our bylaws only require a simple majority) at a scheduled meeting and the vote is 30 for, 32 against and 30 abstentions, I presume the vote fails....you do not take into account the total number of votes, i.e. 92 and decide that 32 is not a majority of 92...or the 30 abstentions become a no vote and 62 is a majority of 92. Obviously I am confused as to when the abstentions become a no vote....HELPOkay, with a majority vote, it takes a majority in favor to adopt. Anything less causes the motion to be lost. That means those in favor must be greater than those opposed. 30 in favor and 32 against. Those in favor are not greater, so the motion is lost. Abstentions do not count. Only votes count. If 100 are present and 15 vote, only 8 votes are required to adopt, because 8 is more than half of 15. The vote count could be 8-7 and the motion would have achieved a majority vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mary Whigham Posted February 24, 2012 at 09:53 PM Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 at 09:53 PM When does an abstention become a "no" vote as indicated in Robert's...(I googled that paragraph from theRobert's web site) .i.e. in your example of 100...if 85 abstain, 15 vote and 8 vote for and 7 vote against, do the 85 become no votes and carry the day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted February 24, 2012 at 10:00 PM Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 at 10:00 PM When does an abstention become a "no" vote as indicated in Robert's.Never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 24, 2012 at 11:01 PM Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 at 11:01 PM When does an abstention become a "no" vote as indicated in Robert's...(I googled that paragraph from theRobert's web site) .i.e. in your example of 100...if 85 abstain, 15 vote and 8 vote for and 7 vote against, do the 85 become no votes and carry the day?No. Abstentions do not count. If you read RONR, you'll eventually come across the concept that in some circumstances an abstention has the same effect on the outcome of a vote as would a negative vote. For the purposes of understanding a majority vote, put the previous sentence out of your mind. It's as if those who abstained didn't vote at all… because they DIDN'T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:11 PM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:11 PM Mary, it becomes different when, instead of a majority vote, what's called for is a vote of the majority of those present. In that case, say there's 100 members present and 50 abstain. Even if 30 vote yes and 20 no, the motion fails because 51 votes were needed to pass. That 50 abstained guaranteed there wouldn't be 51 yes votes, so the abstentions affected the vote, but are not votes themselves. Had a simple majority vote been required 30 to 20 woulda done it. That's the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:25 PM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:25 PM Even if 30 vote yes and 20 no . . . .And if you wanted to give an extreme example, even if 50 members voted "yes" and no members voted "no", the motion would still be lost if the affirmative vote of a majority of the members present was required, such would be the effect of the 50 abstentions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:50 PM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 03:50 PM I fear we're training Mary to run hurdles before she has learned to walk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g40 Posted February 25, 2012 at 05:39 PM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 05:39 PM Let me give some real-life examples from an organization where I am a Board member.We have a seven member board. A quorum (defined in our bylaws) is a majority of board positions (whether filled or not). The quorum is therefore four. Regular motions require a majority (per RONR) to pass. If, for example, fivew board members were present and 2 voted in favor, one against and two abstained - the motion passes (a majority of those present and voting). Abstentions do not count. It would pass if one voted in favor and four abstained.Our bylaws have specific provisions for changes to those bylaws. The requirement is 2/3 vote of the entire board positions (whether filled or not). 2/3 of 7 requires five in favor. So, not matter how many board members attend a meeting, and no matter how many vacant positions exist, five board members must vote in favor to make bylaws changes. So, in this case, if five board members attend a meeting and, on a motion to amend the bylaws, four voted in favor of the motion and one abstained - the motion failed because 4 of 7 is not 2/3. In this case (because of specific bylaws provisions) an anstention has the same effect as a no vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mary Whigham Posted February 26, 2012 at 03:39 PM Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 at 03:39 PM Wonderful responses...I am running hurdles!!! Thanks, Mary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted February 26, 2012 at 05:35 PM Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 at 05:35 PM Another way of realizing that "abstentions don't count" (in the usual situation) is to contemplate that those members who didn't even show up for the meeting abstained from voting just as much as those members who came and remained silent (or sat on their hands) and you sure aren't going to count the absentees!"Showing up", of course, DOES contribute to the quorum. But that is a count that is independent of whether someone votes or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mary Whigham Posted February 27, 2012 at 09:02 PM Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 at 09:02 PM Should the choice "I Abstain" be listed along with "I Agree" or "I Do Not Agree" as a choice on a required paper ballot to determine an issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted February 27, 2012 at 09:06 PM Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 at 09:06 PM Should the choice "I Abstain" be listed along with "I Agree" or "I Do Not Agree" as a choice on a required paper ballot to determine an issue?No. A member wishing to abstain simply turns in a blank ballot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted February 28, 2012 at 12:03 AM Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 at 12:03 AM A member wishing to abstain simply turns in a blank ballot.Or no ballot at all (unless he wants to appear to have voted, perhaps to avoid any social stigma).MabffJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 28, 2012 at 12:25 AM Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 at 12:25 AM Should the choice "I Abstain" be listed along with "I Agree" or "I Do Not Agree" as a choice on a required paper ballot to determine an issue?No, but if you feel that members do not know that they have a right to abstain, you should point that out, by making a Parliamentary Inquiry on the subject. The chair's response will provide the answer to the assembly and perhaps enlighten some voters. See RONR (11th ed.), p. 413, for a sample of a ballot.See RONR (11th ed.), p. 407, ll. 12-19 for the RIGHT OF ABSTENTION. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted February 28, 2012 at 03:04 AM Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 at 03:04 AM If a vote ... is 30 for, 32 against and 30 abstentions, I presume the vote fails....you do not take into account the total number of votes, i.e. 92 and decide that 32 is not a majority of 92...or the 30 abstentions become a no vote and 62 is a majority of 92. Obviously I am confused as to when the abstentions become a no vote....HELPIn the case you mention, the total number of votes is not 92. The total number of votes is 62. People who abstain from voting have not voted, so their abstentions are not votes. The motion fails because 30 is not greater than 32.Abstentions never become No votes (nor do they ever become Yes votes), but they have the effect of No votes if a majority (or 2/3) of some fixed number is required. In that case, only the number of Yes votes matters, and it must be a majority (or 2/3) of that fixed number. In that circumstance, No votes and abstensions have an identical effect because neither of them adds to the Yes vote total. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted February 28, 2012 at 11:54 AM Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 at 11:54 AM ...(nor do they ever become Yes votes)....Unless you're in British Columbia local government circles, it seems, according to the National Parliamentarian (Vol 73 No 1, p. 32). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 28, 2012 at 05:31 PM Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 at 05:31 PM Unless you're in British Columbia local government circles, it seems, according to the National Parliamentarian (Vol 73 No 1, p. 32).Well, whenever there is a specific rule contained in the bylaws or higher governing document or applicable law, those provisions supersede RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted February 28, 2012 at 11:55 PM Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 at 11:55 PM Unless you're in British Columbia local government circles, it seems, according to the National Parliamentarian (Vol 73 No 1, p. 32).Lots of local government bodies have bizarre rules which supersede RONR, but they're beyond the scope of RONR and this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted February 28, 2012 at 11:57 PM Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 at 11:57 PM Lots of local government bodies have bizarre rules which supersede RONR, but they're beyond the scope of RONR and this forum.Yup. I just think it can be misleading to assert abstentions never become no votes or yes votes without at least that disclaimer, as we don't know where the poster comes from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted February 29, 2012 at 12:03 AM Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 at 12:03 AM Yup. I just think it can be misleading to assert abstentions never become no votes or yes votes without at least that disclaimer, as we don't know where the poster comes from.Well, I don't object to the "unless your Bylaws or applicable law provide otherwise" disclaimer in and of itself (which applies to just about everything we talk about on this forum), but it's best to keep it general rather than discussing the specifics of particular organizations, states, provinces, etc., lest some well-meaning citizen of British Columbia stumbles upon your post and runs with it rather than prudently talking to a lawyer about whether and how the law applies to the particular organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted February 29, 2012 at 12:06 AM Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 at 12:06 AM Point well taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.