Reason for votes Questioned by chair

[Guest Exhausted]

At a recent school board meeting a motion failed with a vote of 3 for 3 against 2 abstentions.

The motion failed to receive 51% of the vote and failed.

The chairman and vice chairman were both on the failing side.

Our school board has a policy that states that members will conform to the majority rule.

There was no discussion on the issue by those voting against the motion. The chairman after anouncing the vote made accusations against the membership that there was an apparent "agenda" being addressed and not the one before the board. The chairman continued to make accusations that prior discussion must be at hand because no one spoke against the motion yet it failed.

After a few minutes while this continued I called a point of order to which I addressed that the chair was making accusations against fellow board members and did not provide facts to support his accusations. I ststed that as an officer of the state all elected officials are presumed closther in intergrity and honesty and that unfounded accusations were direct attacts against the character of the members to which his comments were aimed - those voting against and the abstention... I also stated that a member can not be compelled to vote, not vote or abstain, however there are circumstances to which ethically one should not vote.

The above was duplicated the second time when the next motion put before the board failed. I again addressed the issue as above and the chair stated in both cases that my point of order was NOT well taken.

Please advise.

[Tim Wynn]

Do you have a specific question?

There is no rule that members must speak against a motion in order to vote against it, and it appears that the chair could use some training on parliamentary procedure.

[Rev Ed]

Plus the motion was defeated (a tie vote defeats a motion) and thus there should be no discussion about why it failed - or even if it passed for that matter.

[jstackpo]

And the chairman was wrong about your points of order. Did you appeal his ruling? (p. 255)

Can you get a new president? Or failing that, get him a copy of...

RONRIB:

"Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised In Brief", Updated Second Edition (Da Capo Press, Perseus Books Group, 2011). It is a splendid summary of all the rules you will really need in all but the most exceptional situations. And only $7.50! You can read it in an evening.

You can order it here.

[Trina]

You (and another member to second) could have appealed the chair's ruling on your points of order. That would put the ultimate decision on the point of order into the hands of the assembly (the assembly, after debate, would vote on whether the chair's ruling should be upheld).

[Guest Edgar]

Our school board has a policy that states that members will conform to the majority rule.

And just what the heck does that mean?