Participation in electronic meeting

[Guest Dan]

At a meeting of a deliberative body, would a motion to "suspend the rules to allow electronic participation" be in order? The by-laws do not address electronic meetings--yet.

I would appreciate an explanation because I may be called upon to explain this later.

[Chris Harrison]

If the bylaws don't specifically provide for electronic meetings then you can't have them because " It is a fundamental principle of parliamentary law that the right to vote is limited to the members of an organization who are actually present at the time the vote is taken in a regular or properly called meeting, although it should be noted that a member need not be present when the question is put. Exceptions to this rule must be expressly stated in the bylaws." (RONR p. 423 ll. 17-23).

[Guest Dan]

Thanks for your quick response. At the risk of starting a new thread, what are the consequences of the chair allowing such a motion or, upon appeal, the chair's ruling that the motion is out of order being overturned? If the vote then is taken and the motion to suspend the rule passes, is the member on the phone allowed to participate and vote?

[Chris Harrison]

.At the risk of starting a new thread, what are the consequences of the chair allowing such a motion or, upon appeal, the chair's ruling that the motion is out of order being overturned?

If the assembly decides to willfully violate the rules you aren't going to see a platoon of parliamentarians invade your meeting hall gavels a'swinging or anything like that.

If the vote then is taken and the motion to suspend the rule passes, is the member on the phone allowed to participate and vote?

The assembly is going to do what they are going to do irregardless of the rules.

[Guest Edgar]

If the vote then is taken and the motion to suspend the rule passes, is the member on the phone allowed to participate and vote?

Allowed by the rule-breakers? Apparently.

Allowed by the rules? No.

[jstackpo]

However... if reason prevails (at a later date) whatever is adopted (with a possible caveat, see below) could be ruled (upon a member raising a point of order) null and void as a continuing breach as described on p. 251, paragraph (d) and p. 262, lines 19-21. But don't hold your breath waiting for "reason to prevail".

Possible caveat (but I'll let others be more assured than I): if the phone-in member's vote is not critical to the adoption (or defeat) of an issue, (like with a one vote margin) then you might argue that the decision stands without a "continuing breach". This would be analogous to the way one can ignore illegal (ballot) vote(s) if it(they) couldn't make a difference in the outcome, p. 416. But I am not entirely convinced of this.

[David A Foulkes]

The assembly is going to do what they are going to do irregardless of the rules.

Edgar -- nothing?

[Guest Edgar]

Edgar -- nothing?

I don't know what's happening to me.

[Guest Dan]

Thanks for your assistance.

[Guest Gene]

One more thing to consider, Guest Dan, is whether or not your board is subject to any local, state, or federal law requiring the members to be present, in which case amending the bylaws to permit electronic voting would be useless.