Guest Robbie Niquanicappo Posted May 1, 2017 at 06:12 PM Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 at 06:12 PM I have seen many instances of the terms of reference of a committee say; "The Chair of the committee shall cast a second tie breaking vote." or "The Chair shall cast a second tie breaking vote." When the Chair of the committee is not chairing the meeting, who gets the tie breaking vote? The Chair of the committee, or the chair of the meeting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted May 1, 2017 at 06:37 PM Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 at 06:37 PM 21 minutes ago, Guest Robbie Niquanicappo said: I have seen many instances of the terms of reference of a committee say; "The Chair of the committee shall cast a second tie breaking vote." or "The Chair shall cast a second tie breaking vote." When the Chair of the committee is not chairing the meeting, who gets the tie breaking vote? The Chair of the committee, or the chair of the meeting? Your organization will need to interpret its own rules. Nothing in RONR permits the chairman to cast two votes. For what it is worth, the rule in RONR is that the chairman shall not vote unless his vote would affect the result or the vote is taken by ballot, and by "chairman" I mean the person who is chairing the meeting at the time. In committees and small boards, however, this rule does not apply, and the chair is free to vote in all cases. Under no circumstances may the chair vote twice. If there is a tie, the motion is defeated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Katz Posted May 1, 2017 at 07:03 PM Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 at 07:03 PM 24 minutes ago, Josh Martin said: For what it is worth, the rule in RONR is that the chairman shall not vote unless his vote would affect the result or the vote is taken by ballot, and by "chairman" I mean the person who is chairing the meeting at the time. In committees and small boards, however, this rule does not apply, and the chair is free to vote in all cases. Under no circumstances may the chair vote twice. If there is a tie, the motion is defeated. Agreeing with Mr. Martin, it is also true that many organizations (and chairs, oddly enough...) misinterpret this rule to allow the chair to vote twice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie Niquanicappo Posted May 5, 2017 at 07:12 PM Report Share Posted May 5, 2017 at 07:12 PM Ok, thanks. Never made sense to me that the Chair gets to vote twice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie Niquanicappo Posted May 25, 2017 at 08:36 PM Report Share Posted May 25, 2017 at 08:36 PM Ok, let's revise my original question. Example: "The Chair of the committee shall cast a tie breaking vote." VS "The Chair shall cast a second tie breaking vote." When the Chair of the committee is not chairing the meeting, who gets the tie breaking vote? The Chair of the committee, or the chair of the meeting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted May 25, 2017 at 09:19 PM Report Share Posted May 25, 2017 at 09:19 PM Whoever is the presiding officer -- i.e., the "chair" -- is the one who should not vote other than to break OR MAKE a tie, thus causing the motion to be defeated by a tie. And he/she is not required to do so in any event. Do your bylaws really say "shall" thus making it a requirement to vote? Not a good bylaw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted May 25, 2017 at 10:40 PM Report Share Posted May 25, 2017 at 10:40 PM 1 hour ago, Robbie Niquanicappo said: Ok, let's revise my original question. Example: "The Chair of the committee shall cast a tie breaking vote." VS "The Chair shall cast a second tie breaking vote." When the Chair of the committee is not chairing the meeting, who gets the tie breaking vote? The Chair of the committee, or the chair of the meeting? The rule in RONR which provides that the chairman shall vote only if his vote would affect the result or if the vote is taken by ballot applies to whoever is presiding at the time. This rule does not apply in committees. The chair is free to vote in all cases in meetings of a committee. If a vote is tied, the motion fails. There is no tie-breaking vote. Your organization appears to have its own rules on this subject, and it is up to your organization to interpret its own rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Katz Posted May 26, 2017 at 03:42 AM Report Share Posted May 26, 2017 at 03:42 AM Yes, but this looks like an easy one. If the bylaws grant the "chair of the committee" an extra vote to "break a tie," then I see no reason that should transfer to the presiding officer, any more than the right to appoint committees transfers from the President to the presiding officer when the bylaws say "the President shall appoint all committees." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie Niquanicappo Posted May 26, 2017 at 02:31 PM Report Share Posted May 26, 2017 at 02:31 PM (edited) Ok, thanks to all for replying. I asked this question because I have seen it often. I am currently revising bylaws and meeting procedures for the organization I work for. They were written by my predecessor and I decided to post my question here since you guys seem to know what's what. My question topic is the only thing I have found so far that gave me pause. Again, Thanks. P.S. Thanks to jstackpo for the tip about "shall". Edited May 26, 2017 at 02:33 PM by Robbie Niquanicappo Forgot the p.s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted May 26, 2017 at 06:35 PM Report Share Posted May 26, 2017 at 06:35 PM 14 hours ago, Joshua Katz said: Yes, but this looks like an easy one. If the bylaws grant the "chair of the committee" an extra vote to "break a tie," then I see no reason that should transfer to the presiding officer, any more than the right to appoint committees transfers from the President to the presiding officer when the bylaws say "the President shall appoint all committees." Yes, but the difference is that the term "President" quite clearly refers to the President. The term "chair" however, when used in the context of a meeting, is ambiguous. It might refer to the regular presiding officer, or it might refer to the current presiding officer. Try changing the wording in your analogous example to "the Chair shall appoint all committees" and see if you think this is still an easy question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Katz Posted May 26, 2017 at 11:12 PM Report Share Posted May 26, 2017 at 11:12 PM 4 hours ago, Josh Martin said: Try changing the wording in your analogous example to "the Chair shall appoint all committees" and see if you think this is still an easy question. Depends. If it says that, sure, it's hard. If it says "the chair of the committee shall..." it seems easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts