Taking a vote during a conference call

[Guest Howard West]

In the original senario - A vote was phrased in a way where all members had to state "I" as the answer to ratify. However, given you could no see everyone, you could not determine who actually stated "i". The suggestion was made that a roll call should be implemented for each board member to clearly state their answer. However, rather than implement that procedure, the vote was re-phrased to say that all members who oppose the motion, should state "I". So in essence, silence was the determining factor to pass the motion and because no one spoke, the motion passed. Was this proper voting rules? I do not agree with this procedure and want to provide the board with a best practice procedure for conference call votes. However, I would like to get "official" input from Robert's Rules Of Order, prior to making any suggestions.

Best Regards,

HLW

[jstackpo]

Presuming -- a big presumption, perhaps -- that your bylaws permit absentee voting via telephone (RONR doesn't - see p. 423) , the only way to be really sure that only members are voting and to get an accurate count is your roll call "suggestion". But this would have to be put in your bylaws or rules ahead of time; RONR doesn't have any "official" telephone voting rules - see p. 92 ff.

Your "inverting" of the voting process such that silence implied consent took away any member's right to abstain from voting at all. But so did your initial "Aye" (not "I") system unless you also called for votes against the proposal.

[jstackpo]

Addendum: Some phone conference call systems allow you to vote (semi-secretly, only the chairman will know who is voting and how) using the touch tone buttons.

[Tim Wynn]

In the original senario - A vote was phrased in a way where all members had to state "I" as the answer to ratify. However, given you could no see everyone, you could not determine who actually stated "i". The suggestion was made that a roll call should be implemented for each board member to clearly state their answer. However, rather than implement that procedure, the vote was re-phrased to say that all members who oppose the motion, should state "I". So in essence, silence was the determining factor to pass the motion and because no one spoke, the motion passed. Was this proper voting rules? I do not agree with this procedure and want to provide the board with a best practice procedure for conference call votes. However, I would like to get "official" input from Robert's Rules Of Order, prior to making any suggestions.

Best Regards,

HLW

In a voice vote, the chair determines from the collective sound of the responses which side has it (e.g. if the ayes are considerably denser than the noes, the ayes have it). It is not necessary to know how each particular member voted.

In a voice vote, the chair must always call for the negative vote. See RONR (11th ed.), p. 45, ll. 4-9.

[Trina]

In the original senario - A vote was phrased in a way where all members had to state "I" as the answer to ratify. However, given you could no see everyone, you could not determine who actually stated "i". The suggestion was made that a roll call should be implemented for each board member to clearly state their answer. However, rather than implement that procedure, the vote was re-phrased to say that all members who oppose the motion, should state "I". So in essence, silence was the determining factor to pass the motion and because no one spoke, the motion passed. Was this proper voting rules? I do not agree with this procedure and want to provide the board with a best practice procedure for conference call votes. However, I would like to get "official" input from Robert's Rules Of Order, prior to making any suggestions.

Best Regards,

HLW

Your discomfort with how the vote was implemented perfectly illustrates why RONR says (11th ed. p. 97 ll. 30-34):

'If electronic meetings are to be authorized, it is advisable to adopt additional rules pertaining to their conduct (see Additional Rules for the Conduct of Electronic Meetings, below).'

Under the section entitled ADDITIONAL RULES FOR THE CONDUCT OF ELECTRONIC MEETINGS (pp. 98-99) there is a more detailed outline of the types of additional rules that an organization will probably need to codify, including 'methods for taking and verifying votes.'

So, if your organization has authorized conference call meetings (has it?), it should get busy and come up with the additional rules needed to make the process work properly (RONR does not provide the additional rules; it only points out the need for them).

[i believe Dr. Stackpole mistyped when he mentioned p. 92 (above).]

edited to clarify citations

[jstackpo]

[i believe Dr. Stackpole mistyped when he mentioned p. 92 (above).]

He did indeed - thank you!