Guest Frank V Posted October 19, 2012 at 11:45 AM Report Share Posted October 19, 2012 at 11:45 AM Our By-laws state that all voting shall be by a show of hands or by ayes or nays unless a motion is made and carried by 2/3's to hold a written secret ballot.My question is can I make a motion at our quarterly membership meeting next week to for a written secret ballot or must i wait to make the motion when we have our special membership meeting in mid November where the voting on the petition will take place?I think this can be done, I just wanted Parliamentarian views. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted October 19, 2012 at 01:09 PM Report Share Posted October 19, 2012 at 01:09 PM A very embarrassing morning. I'm of the impression that, normally, motions like ordering a vote by ballot cannot apply to an event in another session, but I don't see a citation (I don't think this is covered by p. 69; p. 71 (8); p. 84, lines 3 - 6; p. 86 - 87 ... p. 283, second paragraph, only reflects that Guest Frank V's proposed motion next week would be an incidental main motion, which I figure it would be anyway. The bottom of p. 285 comes close, but I have a feeling it doesn't have loopholes -- at least I do before my third cup).But this might be a question of interpreting the bylaws (which is best not done on this Robert's Rules-centered website forum; there must be more appropriate venues lurking nearby), if one wants to accept that the paraphrased bylaw provision is intended to allow that the motion ordering a ballot vote on the petition, considered in November, can be made at an earlier session (next week). Not much of a stretch to me. But my mind is flexible to flaccidity before my third cup, and besides, it's interpreting bylaws, so in for a pound, out for a dollar. Eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted October 19, 2012 at 01:14 PM Report Share Posted October 19, 2012 at 01:14 PM My view is that you should make it in November. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted October 19, 2012 at 01:22 PM Report Share Posted October 19, 2012 at 01:22 PM My view is that you should make it in November.Me too. But does he have to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Lages Posted October 19, 2012 at 07:59 PM Report Share Posted October 19, 2012 at 07:59 PM Based on RONR's description of the freedom of each new session (p. 87. ll. 6-21), I would say that if the motion for a secret ballot vote was made at one meeting for application at a later meeting, it could not be enforced at the later meeting. This, of course, assumes that Guest Frank V's organization is the usual type in which each meeting constitutes a separate session. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted October 19, 2012 at 11:31 PM Report Share Posted October 19, 2012 at 11:31 PM But Bruce, it's in the bylaws. Presumably for a reason, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Lages Posted October 20, 2012 at 03:30 AM Report Share Posted October 20, 2012 at 03:30 AM What Guest Frank V said was that his organization's bylaws required a motion and a 2/3 vote to hold a ballot vote. I don't see how that overrides, or impacts in any way, RONR's statements regarding the freedom of each new session. Now if the motion for which a ballot vote is ordered is introduced at the earlier session and then postponed to the later session, I'll admit that I'm not sure whether the order for a ballot vote would necessarily carry over as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Lages Posted October 20, 2012 at 03:41 AM Report Share Posted October 20, 2012 at 03:41 AM I should have checked RONR before I answered. P. 285, ll. 30-35, says that an order for the method of voting is exhausted when the question on which it was imposed has been finally disposed of, or at the conclusion of the session in which the order has been adopted, whichever comes first. That would indicate to me that if the order for a ballot vote was made at the earlier meeting (session), it would not carry over to the later meeting (session) if the motion on which the ballot vote was ordered was postponed from one session to the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted October 20, 2012 at 05:10 PM Report Share Posted October 20, 2012 at 05:10 PM Based on RONR's description of the freedom of each new session (p. 87. ll. 6-21), I would say that if the motion for a secret ballot vote was made at one meeting for application at a later meeting, it could not be enforced at the later meeting. This, of course, assumes that Guest Frank V's organization is the usual type in which each meeting constitutes a separate session.But Bruce, it's in the bylaws. Presumably for a reason, eh?Gary, let's just not answer this as a bylaw question, but as an RONR one, which I'm hoping I get right. I'm not even sure the motion is in order, as Bruce noted, because it's one that has no application at the current meeting and more importantly, at the special meeting in question, it will take more than a majority vote to rescind the adopted IMM to take the vote on the subject of the special meeting by ballot (sans someone giving previous notice of a motion to do so). As Bruce already cited, that's improper.Either way I think the motion should be ruled out of order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.