Multiple nominations - upon which is the first vote taken

[Guest Joe Bob Hitchcock]

At a city council meeting, the current council is going to nominate and confirm someone to fill a vacant seat. The first candidate is nominated, and there is a second. Before a vote is taken, a second person is nominated and seconded. Now the council will vote. Does the council initially vote on the first or second name?

[Weldon Merritt]

At a city council meeting, the current council is going to nominate and confirm someone to fill a vacant seat. The first candidate is nominated, and there is a second. Before a vote is taken, a second person is nominated and seconded. Now the council will vote. Does the council initially vote on the first or second name?

For purposes of this response, I will assume that the council has the authority to fill its own vacancies, and that the procedure is governed by RONR (with no contrary provisions in applicable statues or ordinaces). With those assumptions, first, nominations do not require seconds. And second, it is not proper to vote "yes" or "no" on individual candidates. The proper way is to vote on all candidates (preferably by ballot), with the voters voting for whichever candidate they prefer. And if the vote is by ballot, voters may even write in the name of an un-nominated candidate. If any candidate gets a majoirty (more than half) of the votes cast, that candidate is elected. If not, you vote again, as often as necessary, until a candidate does receive a majority.

[Dan Honemann]

At a city council meeting, the current council is going to nominate and confirm someone to fill a vacant seat. The first candidate is nominated, and there is a second. Before a vote is taken, a second person is nominated and seconded. Now the council will vote. Does the council initially vote on the first or second name?

"When there is more than one nominee for a given office in a viva-voce election—or in an election by rising vote or by show of hands—the candidates are voted on in the order in which they were nominated." RONR (11th ed.), p. 442, ll. 14-17.

[Tim Wynn]

"When there is more than one nominee for a given office in a viva-voce election—or in an election by rising vote or by show of hands—the candidates are voted on in the order in which they were nominated." RONR (11th ed.), p. 442, ll. 14-17.

Joe Bob Hitchcock, take note that when voting in this manner, those who favor the second candidate will need to vote against the first candidate; otherwise they will likely not have an opportunity to vote.

Also, a good idea might be to move that the vote be taken by ballot.

[alanh49]

Joe Bob Hitchcock, take note that when voting in this manner, those who favor the second candidate will need to vote against the first candidate; otherwise they will likely not have an opportunity to vote.

Also, a good idea might be to move that the vote be taken by ballot.

Since this is a city council meeting, voting by ballot may not be an option

[alanh49]

"When there is more than one nominee for a given office in a viva-voce election—or in an election by rising vote or by show of hands—the candidates are voted on in the order in which they were nominated." RONR (11th ed.), p. 442, ll. 14-17.

Does election by roll call count as a viva-voice election?

[David A Foulkes]

Does election by roll call count as a viva-voice election?

I wouldn't think so. The three methods as cited above are listed as "Regular Methods of Voting on Motions" (p. 409), while Roll Call voting is given separate treatment under the grouping of Other Methods of Voting (p. 412).

[Gary Novosielski]

I would expect that in a roll-call vote, the member would, when his name was called, respond with the name of a candidate, not with Aye or No. I see no support for the idea that this would be done one candidate at a time, as is the case with a voice vote.

In the public board upon which I serve, the election of Pres and VP is customarily handled with a signed ballot. The ballot format overcomes the (perceived) effect of hearing others' votes before one's own. But because state sunshine laws require that substantive votes must be identifiable to the individual member, the signed ballot allows the vote to be recorded in the minutes, much as if it had been a roll-call.

. . .

Now that I think of it, although a second ballot is rarely needed, I believe we only record in the minutes the result of the final ballot that completes the election, and I'm wondering if that's proper. (Or should I have started a new thread?)

[Josh Martin]

Does election by roll call count as a viva-voice election?

No. See RONR, 11th ed., pg. 443, lines 18-25.

Now that I think of it, although a second ballot is rarely needed, I believe we only record in the minutes the result of the final ballot that completes the election, and I'm wondering if that's proper. (Or should I have started a new thread?)

Yes, if you have a question about this, I would start a new thread.

[Guest Edgar]

Yes, if you have a question about this, I would start a new thread.

Where someone will point out that RONR does not say what constitutes a "substantive vote" when "state sunshine laws require that substantive votes must be identifiable to the individual member" and which intermediate votes, if any, therefore belong in the minutes.

[Josh Martin]

Where someone will point out that RONR does not say what constitutes a "substantive vote" when "state sunshine laws require that substantive votes must be identifiable to the individual member" and which intermediate votes, if any, therefore belong in the minutes.

While I agree with the first part of your statement, it would seem to me that under RONR, all tellers' reports should be recorded in the minutes, based upon RONR, 11th ed., pg. 418, lines 26-27. But these are the sorts of arguments I hoped would be confined to their own thread, so as not to distract from Mr. Hitchcock's question.

[Guest Nancy N.]

... But these are the sorts of arguments I hoped would be confined to their own thread, so as not to distract from Mr. Hitchcock's question.

For pity's sake, why? Guest Joe Bob Hitchcock got his question answered with the first two, maybe three, replies. After that we're on our own. Nobody here is in it for the money (except maybe Mervosh, with his obscenely plutocratic $4.51 an hour. Great Steaming Cobnuts), so with the job done, why object to passably intelligent and informed conversation?

c.t. 5! (Maybe why the original questions are fewer?)