Change of Vote

[Guest Howard]

I sit on a county commission board of five commissioners.  At our last meeting (on April 6th) a vote on an agenda item took place.  The chairman announced the results as 4-1 passes.  I sit at on extreme end of the seating of the commissioners and I did not hear who gave the negative vote and I asked who cast the negative vote.  The commissioner sitting to my left said "Ralph" (Ralph is the Chairman) and the Chairman (who sits two seats to my left) said "me". The two other commissioners sit still farther away to my left and neither said anything in response to my question.

 

That was the last item under the Planning and Zoning portion of the agenda.

 

The Chairman then went on to the agenda that concerned the County Attorney.  The County Attorney said that she had no items for the Board.

 

The Chairman then went on the next item on the agenda which was the County Administrator.  The County Administrator discussed his first item and said that the first item was informational.  No vote was needed.

 

The County Administrator went on to present a second item of his.  After the County Administrator presented his second item (the second item did not require a vote of the Board)  and after over two minutes had passed since the 4-1 vote of the Planning and Zoning item, a commissioner sitting three seats away form me, said to the staff taking the minutes of the meeting, "I joined Ralph in that vote", (referring to the 4-1 Planning and Zoning vote as that was the most recent vote, but never stating that was the vote being referred to).  

 

Nothing more was said or done.  The Board was not asked if they concurred or not.  The commissioner who said, "I joined Ralph in that vote. It was a 3-2 vote.", did not say he doubted the vote.  The Chairman said he did not hear the no vote.  The chairman sits adjacent to the commissioner who said that he joined Ralph (the chairman) in that vote. The commissioner who said that that he voted with Ralph, said the chairman needed hearing aids.

 

I listened to the vote on the audio/video over a dozen times.  It is difficult to hear when the multiple "ayes" are said if the commissioner who said he voted with "Ralph" voted yes, but he is not heard voting against the item when the nays are called for.  

 

After two minutes had passed since the 4-1 vote and after two agenda headings being called and handled by the Chairman and after two items discussed by the County Administrator, and with no call out of "division" and with no commissioner doubting the vote, what is the final status of the vote?  Neither the chairman nor the Board agreed to change the vote as stated by the chairman as 4-1.  The minutes are coming to the Board for approval at our April 20th meeting and the minutes reflect a 3-2 vote for the Planning and Zoning item (i assume, based on the statement of the commissioner who stated that he voted with Ralph).

 

Under Roberts Rules how should the vote be reflected in the minutes (4-1 or 3-2)?  Either way the item passes. Could the vote be changed by the statement of the one commissioner at the time he made the statement?  

[Josh Martin]

Under Roberts Rules how should the vote be reflected in the minutes (4-1 or 3-2)?

 

Neither. The count is not recorded for a voice vote. The minutes should simply note that the motion was adopted.

 

Could the vote be changed by the statement of the one commissioner at the time he made the statement?  

 

No. It was too late for that.

[Edgar Guest]

Might this have something to do with this topic?

[Richard Brown]

Since this is the second time this question has come up, I will point out that this appears to be a public body and therefore might be subject to state open meetings (sunshine) laws and other statutes, ordinances and rules applicable to this type body.  In my experience, those rules often require roll call votes on all substantive motions.  If you haven't checked them, you might do so just to be sure you are doing things correctly.

[George Mervosh]

Since this is the second time this question has come up, I will point out that this appears to be a public body and therefore might be subject to state open meetings (sunshine) laws and other statutes, ordinances and rules applicable to this type body.  In my experience, those rules often require roll call votes on all substantive motions.  If you haven't checked them, you might do so just to be sure you are doing things correctly.

 

What in the world does open meeting (sunshine) laws have to do with this subject?   

[Howard]

Yes,  each commissioner's vote is recorded for the public record and all votes are voice votes for the body of five commissioners.  Our minutes reflect the vote of each commissioner either by for, against or abstain (state form has to be completed when a commissioner abstains).

[Gary Novosielski]

The only valid way to do that is will roll-call votes.

[Richard Brown]

What in the world does open meeting (sunshine) laws have to do with this subject?   

Well, I don't know about the open meetings laws in your state, but in my state and a couple of other states I'm familiar with, they provide that all votes of governmental bodies.... city councils, commissions, boards, etc..... must be on the record, either electronically or via roll  call.  And, based on the additional information the OP posted above, I'm willing to bet that is the case in his state, too, since he said their individual votes are recorded.  So, a regular voice vote with the yeas and nays would not comply with those requirements.

 

I just suggested that he check it out.  Based on his additional information, I think my hunch was right.

[Josh Martin]

Yes, each commissioner's vote is recorded for the public record and all votes are voice votes for the body of five commissioners. Our minutes reflect the vote of each commissioner either by for, against or abstain (state form has to be completed when a commissioner abstains).

If each commissioner's vote is recorded, the votes should be taken by roll call, so that there is no doubt about how each commissioner casts his vote. A roll call vote is taken by the Secretary reading each member's name in alphabetical order, to which the member responds "yes," "no," "present" (or "abstain"), or "pass," indicating that the Secretary should come back to him after all other names have been called. The member's response is promptly recorded. If this procedure had been properly followed, this situation never would have arisen in the first place. This procedure should be followed in the future.

As you have recently learned, trying to record the votes of individual members on a voice vote is extremely problematic. Since it is already done, however, and since the commissioner did not promptly address the issue, I suppose the minutes will need to record this as a 4-1 vote, with the commissioner in question voting in the affirmative, but the fault for this error lies with the chair and secretary as well.

[Gary Novosielski]

I have to place the blame primarily on the chair.  It's the chair who puts the question.  

 

If instead of saying "Those in favor say Aye", the chair had properly said "The secretary will call the roll", the mess could have been avoided.

[Howard]

I will be pulling the minutes of the prior meeting from the consent agenda.  Whether the vote is 4-1 or 3-2 does not change that the item passed.  What is at play here is politics in the sense that since the a commissioner's vote is being attempted to be changed in order to possibly be able to say the item passed but I voted against it when the commissioner wanted the item to pass.  After the vote, he is assured the item passes even if he changes his vote.  The timeliness is an issue.  I will be requesting that the voting be done electronically and the roll read only after al votes are electronically received by the staff in charge of taking the minutes.

 

You have all be exceedingly helpful.  Thank you.  Howard