star1441 Posted March 22, 2019 at 12:58 AM Report Share Posted March 22, 2019 at 12:58 AM The Board recommended punishment. The general membership voted improperly. Instead of a vote by ballot, as mandated, the vote was open, by raising of hands. The vote was later ruled null and void. Can the proposed sentence be brought again for a new vote (this time properly, by ballot), Or will this be considered double jeopardy,a second bite at the apple, and the matter should be sealed and buried? Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hieu H. Huynh Posted March 22, 2019 at 01:00 AM Report Share Posted March 22, 2019 at 01:00 AM Generally a defeated motion can be brought up again at the next meeting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Katz Posted March 22, 2019 at 01:25 AM Report Share Posted March 22, 2019 at 01:25 AM 22 minutes ago, Hieu H. Huynh said: Generally a defeated motion can be brought up again at the next meeting. Agreed, but this motion was not defeated. 24 minutes ago, star1441 said: The vote was later ruled null and void. By whom? It seems to me that whoever made this ruling was incorrect if no point of order was raised at the time to the voting method. 24 minutes ago, star1441 said: Can the proposed sentence be brought again for a new vote (this time properly, by ballot), Or will this be considered double jeopardy,a second bite at the apple, and the matter should be sealed and buried? Seemingly, an incorrect ruling was issued, but there was no point of order/appeal to that incorrect ruling. Thus, I suppose the parliamentary position is as if the motion had never been adopted, and it is in order to make the motion again. It's bad enough that the "bite at the apple" phrase has become so popular in the law, despite its absurdity (you can bite apples twice!). Let's not let it infect parliamentary procedure as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted March 22, 2019 at 02:59 AM Report Share Posted March 22, 2019 at 02:59 AM 1 hour ago, star1441 said: The general membership voted improperly. Instead of a vote by ballot, as mandated, the vote was open, by raising of hands. By what rule or provision or motion was a ballot vote mandated? Is the requirement for a vote by ballot in disciplinary proceedings included in the bylaws? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Zev Posted March 22, 2019 at 04:45 AM Report Share Posted March 22, 2019 at 04:45 AM FYI: Quote Each of the specifications, and then the charge, is read, opened to debate, and voted on separately -- although the several votes can be delayed to be taken on a single ballot. RONR 11th edition, page 667, and Quote If the accused is found guilty of none of the specifications relating to a charge, he is automatically found not guilty of the charge, and no vote is taken on it (or, if the vote on the charge was already taken on the same ballot as the vote on the specifications, the vote on the charge is ignored). RONR 11th edition, page 667, and Quote On the demand of a single member both the question of guilt and the question of the penalty must be voted on by ballot. RONR 11th edition, page 668. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted March 22, 2019 at 05:42 AM Report Share Posted March 22, 2019 at 05:42 AM If the requirement of a ballot vote is not in your bylaws, I agree with Mr. Katz that a timely point of order would have been required. If no timely point of order was made, the breach was waived. We sometimes refer to it as "you snooze, you lose". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Zev Posted March 22, 2019 at 07:41 AM Report Share Posted March 22, 2019 at 07:41 AM Quote (e) any action has been taken in violation of a rule protecting absentees, a rule in the bylaws requiring a vote to be taken by ballot, or a rule protecting a basic right of an individual member (pp. 263-64). RONR 11th edition, page 251. Curiously, the sample bylaws on pages 583-588 say nothing that suggests that disciplinary measures must be adopted by ballot votes although the requirements for such measures in the text of this book always demand it. I wonder if the absence of this specific requirement that gives rise to the "snooze, you lose" outcome was intentional or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted March 22, 2019 at 12:28 PM Report Share Posted March 22, 2019 at 12:28 PM No rule in RONR requires that voting in disciplinary proceedings be by ballot if no member demands a ballot vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted March 22, 2019 at 01:40 PM Report Share Posted March 22, 2019 at 01:40 PM 12 hours ago, star1441 said: The Board recommended punishment. The general membership voted improperly. Instead of a vote by ballot, as mandated, the vote was open, by raising of hands. The vote was later ruled null and void. Just to be certain, do your bylaws require a ballot vote for discipline? 12 hours ago, star1441 said: Can the proposed sentence be brought again for a new vote (this time properly, by ballot), Yes. 12 hours ago, star1441 said: Or will this be considered double jeopardy,a second bite at the apple, and the matter should be sealed and buried? There is no “double jeopardy” rule in RONR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts