Guest Herman S. Lilja Posted September 11, 2012 at 06:25 PM Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 at 06:25 PM A hand vote was taken as directed by the Moderator requiring a 2/3 majority. The outcome of the vote was 65.6% in favor of the motion. The moderator indicated that the motion failed. A voting participant directed a request to the moderator indicating that because the vote was so close he demanded a recount. After a few minutes of indecision, during which individuals from both factions left and returned to the voting area, the Moderator granted a second vote on the same issue. The second vote was 64.3% in favor of the motion. The motion failed; however, should the Moderator have permitted the second vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Lages Posted September 11, 2012 at 06:59 PM Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 at 06:59 PM RONR does not grant individual members the right to demand a recount - that would have to be a decision of the assembly. In addition, a recount is not the same as a re-vote. A re-vote was certainly not in order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted September 11, 2012 at 07:03 PM Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 at 07:03 PM RONR does not grant individual members the right to demand a recount - that would have to be a decision of the assembly.In this instance, couldn't a member demand a Division of the Assembly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted September 11, 2012 at 07:18 PM Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 at 07:18 PM In this instance, couldn't a member demand a Division of the Assembly?The vote should have probably been taken as a rising vote to begin with, since the requirement is a 2/3 vote and it doesn't sound like it was a very small assembly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted September 11, 2012 at 07:27 PM Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 at 07:27 PM The vote should have probably been taken as a rising vote to begin with, since the requirement is a 2/3 vote and it doesn't sound like it was a very small assembly.But . . . in this instance, couldn't a member demand a Division of the Assembly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted September 11, 2012 at 07:33 PM Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 at 07:33 PM But . . . in this instance, couldn't a member demand a Division of the Assembly?No. When the vote was counted (and it was counted according to the OP), it's too late for a division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted September 11, 2012 at 08:33 PM Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 at 08:33 PM Why is it too late to demand a division? Is it possible as long as it immediately follows the announced result and no other business has started? I'm specifically looking at page 408 line 28 to p409 line 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted September 11, 2012 at 08:44 PM Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 at 08:44 PM It's in order to demand a divison when a vote is taken by voice or a show of hands but I'm not sure it is after a vote has been counted.In this case, it seems to me nothing might have been in order since members left the voting area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted September 11, 2012 at 08:54 PM Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 at 08:54 PM It's in order to demand a divison when a vote is taken by voice or a show of hands but I'm not sure it is after a vote has been counted.I'm sure; it's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Lages Posted September 11, 2012 at 09:15 PM Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 at 09:15 PM Guest Herman S Lilja -Permit me to try to apply everything that's been said here to your specific situation. While RONR does not allow a single member to demand a recount, it does allow for a single member to demand a 'division of the assembly' (or division) in cases where a voice vote or a vote by a show of hands (which RONR does not consider as a counted vote) is inconclusive. When a division is ordered, the vote is re-taken by asking each side of the question to stand, in turn, and be counted. A savvy chair could probably have asked the member demanding a recount, or perhaps assumed, that he was asking for a division. However, since you took the original vote as a counted vote, a division would not have been in order, as has been pointed out by George and Dan.The other issue with your voting scenario is that it sound like it may not have been in keeping with RONR's prescription that a re-vote is never taken by the same method as the original vote. Thus, the assembly - but not an individual member - could have ordered a re-vote taken as a rising counted vote, a ballot vote, or even a roll-call vote, but certainly not by doing the same thing over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted September 11, 2012 at 09:25 PM Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 at 09:25 PM I'm sure; it's not. Or maybe I'm not so sure if what was counted was a show of hands. I'll think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest George Mervosh Posted September 11, 2012 at 11:45 PM Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 at 11:45 PM Its bad enough when I don't mean to be wishy washy but I didn't think it was contagious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted September 12, 2012 at 12:23 AM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 12:23 AM Its bad enough when I don't mean to be wishy washy but I didn't think it was contagious. Well, referring back to posts 9 and 11, I suppose what’s bothering me is that if a vote by show of hands has been counted, a demand for a Division is very apt to be dilatory. This is so because voting by show of hands is (or should be) limited to very small assemblies or committees where every member can clearly see every other member present (RONR, 11th ed., p. 47, ll. 11-18), and “When it is clear that there has been a full vote and there can be no reasonable doubt as to which side is in the majority, a call for a Division is dilatory, and the chair should not allow the individual member's right of demanding a Division to be abused to the annoyance of the assembly.” (RONR, 11th ed., p. 282, ll. 5-10.) That said, as best I have been able to determine, it appears to me that if the demand for a Division is not dilatory (which may be the case, for example, if only a few of the members present have voted), it may be made even after a vote by show of hands has been counted, provided that it is made in a timely fashion. (cf. RONR, 11th ed., p. 411, ll. 15-19.)But then again, um, uh .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Herman S. Lilja Posted September 12, 2012 at 02:41 AM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 02:41 AM To clarify, the voters were asked to stand to be counted separately, for and against, both initially and at the time of the second vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Lages Posted September 12, 2012 at 03:17 AM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 03:17 AM To clarify, the voters were asked to stand to be counted separately, for and against, both initially and at the time of the second vote.Aha - so what you actually took was a counted rising vote - twice. In this case, then I think that the demand for a division (and thus the re-vote) was not in order for two reasons: 1) the vote was already done by the method called for in a division, and 2) Dan's point about the demand for a division being dilatory probably applies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted September 12, 2012 at 08:09 AM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 08:09 AM (Incidentally, I think this might be Dan's word-count high, even including five years ago about "any office," consequent to which I still sit down gingerly.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted September 12, 2012 at 11:12 AM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 11:12 AM A hand vote was taken ...To clarify, the voters were asked to stand to be counted separately, for and against, both initially and at the time of the second vote.Ahhh..... I now see from where our confusion stems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Herman S. Lilja Posted September 12, 2012 at 11:52 AM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 11:52 AM To clarify further, 268 people participated in these votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted September 12, 2012 at 01:02 PM Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 at 01:02 PM The outcome of the vote was 65.6% in favor of the motion.The second vote was 64.3% in favor of the motion.To clarify further, 268 people participated in these votes.Well, if you need a two-thirds vote that means you need at least twice as many "yes" votes as "no" votes. So, with a total of 268, you'd need at least 179 affirmative votes. There's no need to calculate percentages at all. Keep it simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.