Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums
Louise Vessey

Recording voter's names on a small board

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,

I'm the National Chair of an association with a small BOD including 7 members and a secretary. We recently had a meeting with a controversial motion that was carried 4 to 3. The 3 members who voted NO wish their names to be recorded as opposing. This came up right after the motion passed. I understand in this case ALL voting  members would have their names recorded with their votes.

What is the process now that the motion has carried? Can we just simply record the votes and names if all the BOD agree to do so?

Do we need to rescind and vote again

Or do we motion to record the names of the votes?

I'm at a loss on this one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Louise Vessey said:

I understand in this case ALL voting  members would have their names recorded with their votes.

Not necessarily, although this certainly could be done.

52 minutes ago, Louise Vessey said:

What is the process now that the motion has carried? Can we just simply record the votes and names if all the BOD agree to do so?

A majority vote is sufficient.

52 minutes ago, Louise Vessey said:

Do we need to rescind and vote again

No.

53 minutes ago, Louise Vessey said:

Or do we motion to record the names of the votes?

Yes, I think this is the correct course of action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with Mr. Martin. In effect, the original poster is saying that three members want to retake the vote by another method, but the time within which an incidental Motion Relating to Methods of Voting and the Polls may be made has expired. See RONR (11th ed.), pp. 283-286; 408, 409.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rob Elsman said:

I disagree with Mr. Martin. In effect, the original poster is saying that three members want to retake the vote by another method, but the time within which an incidental Motion Relating to Methods of Voting and the Polls may be made has expired. See RONR (11th ed.), pp. 283-286; 408, 409.

I disagree strongly with Mr. Elsman and agree completely with Mr. Martin. 
 In addition, even if we are to assume that the meeting has adjourned and The request to list how members voted was never approved, the motion to do so may be made and adopted by a majority vote at the time the minutes are up for approval.

Edited to add: just to be clear, I do not consider that this would be a motion relating to the polls or the method of voting. It is, perhaps, a request for some other privilege, which can be adopted by a majority vote. I think, though, but it is simply a matter that the organization’s  minutes may include whatever the members want them to include. A request to have the minutes note the way certain members voted is a rather common request and may be granted by unanimous consent or with a majority vote.

Edited by Richard Brown
Added last paragraph and made a typographical correction in Mr. Added last paragraph and made a typographical correction in Mr.Elsman’s name

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Mr. Martin and Mr. Brown. I disagree with Mr. Elsman's comment and believe it is completely irrevelent to Ms. Vassey's question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you! I have tried to find this information in our bylaws and in RONR but could not find this specific scenario.

If this motion to include names is overturned to show names then we may vote to rescind and start over. This has been a long emotional process with members very divided. Wish me luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Atul Kapur said:

I agree with Mr. Martin and Mr. Brown. I disagree with Mr. Elsman's comment and believe it is completely irrevelent to Ms. Vassey's question.

I don't believe that.  If I read those minutes and didn't have any details and I saw all 7 member's votes recorded for a particular motion I would believe they voted by roll call.  But they didn't. This doesn't seem like some garden variety request to have a member's dissenting vote recorded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't speaking about a motion to record all 7 names and how they voted. I was speaking to the idea of listing the three members who requested their vote be recorded in the minutes.

Are you saying that, because it would effectively reveal who voted in favour; that it's different? Oral was it because of the notion that all seven names be recorded?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Atul Kapur said:

I wasn't speaking about a motion to record all 7 names and how they voted. I was speaking to the idea of listing the three members who requested their vote be recorded in the minutes.

Are you saying that, because it would effectively reveal who voted in favour; that it's different? Oral was it because of the notion that all seven names be recorded?

Okay, I understand now what you were referring to but in the original post it mentions recording all 7 names and their votes, and Mr. Martin's reply does seem to endorse that it's okay to do so, which is why I agree with Mr. Elsman's response at the time he made it. They didn't vote by roll call but they want the minutes to basically show that they did which I don't think is proper.

Whether recording 3 member's dissenting votes is a stretch for a request for any other privilege I'm not sure about, but it seems like it at first blush.

But I do respectfully disagree that Mr. Elsman's response was irrelevant.

Edited by George Mervosh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Louise Vessey said:

Thank you! I have tried to find this information in our bylaws and in RONR but could not find this specific scenario.

If this motion to include names is overturned to show names then we may vote to rescind and start over. This has been a long emotional process with members very divided. Wish me luck!

Are you suggesting that if a motion to include in the minutes the names of those who voted in opposition to the original motion is defeated, you (all) would move to rescind the original motion and then bring it up again?  I don't see any reason why that would be necessary, or even a good idea. A minority makes a request to have their votes recorded, the majority votes to deny the request. This is how parliamentary decisions are made. Unless there are compelling reasons, perhaps of a legal nature, to grant the request, it's time to move on.

However, if you were suggesting something else by your statement, could you please clarify?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, George Mervosh said:

Okay, I understand now what you were referring to but in the original post it mentions recording all 7 names and their votes, and Mr. Martin's reply does seem to endorse that it's okay to do so, which is why I agree with Mr. Elsman's response at the time he made it. They didn't vote by roll call but they want the minutes to basically show that they did which I don't think is proper.

Whether recording 3 member's dissenting votes is a stretch for a request for any other privilege I'm not sure about, but it seems like it at first blush.

But I do respectfully disagree that Mr. Elsman's response was irrelevant.

George, there was no request to record how ALL seven members voted.  The  motion (or request) was to record how THREE members voted. The OP did say that she "understands" that how all seven members voted should be recorded. Mr. Martin  correctly responded to that point by saying: " Not necessarily, although this certainly could be done."   She then asked: " Can we just simply record the votes and names if all the BOD agree to do so?" and Mr. Martin correctly responded:  " A majority vote is sufficient."  He is correct and I agree with him.  However, even if doing so would require a suspension of the rules (and I DO NOT believe it would), a two thirds vote to do so would be sufficient.  Edited to add  Mr. Martin's response to both questions/statements was correct.

You mentioned that if you read the minutes and they reflected how all seven members voted you would assume the vote was a roll call vote.  Really, what difference would that make?  The only thing important is whether the original motion carried.  The method of voting used is not relevant. Having the minutes state how each member voted simply confirms that the motion did in fact carry by the required threshold AND that a quorum was present.  But, again:  The request of the three members was that THEIR THREE votes be recorded.  Josh Martin's original response was correct on all points.

I agree with Dr. Kapur that Mr. Elsman's response was both non-responsive to the facts in the original post and was therefore irrelevant .  There was no request... timely or otherwise... to have a roll call vote.  The request was simply to have the minutes record how three members voted.  Doing so is perfectly proper by unanimous consent or a majority vote.  I will go further and add that I firmly believe that having the minute state how all seven members voted should be no different.  It could be ordered immediately after the vote or at the time the minutes are approved.... by  either unanimous consent or a majority vote.

 

Edited by Richard Brown
Added last sentence to first paragraph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I understand the issue correctly, three members are requesting that how they voted be recorded in the minutes.  That is a question of privilege and the granting of that is within the control of the majority.  I agree with Messrs. Martin, Brown, Kaptur, Mervosh and Lages.  I would also refer those interested to the article "On the Record, " National Parliamentarian, Fourth Quarter 2000, which gives greater detail on the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to the running disagreement about granting a request to enter an individual member's remarks or vote in the minutes by majority vote, refer to the bottom part of the thread here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Rob Elsman said:

As to the running disagreement about granting a request to enter an individual member's remarks or vote in the minutes by majority vote, refer to the bottom part of the thread here.

Rob, I jut re-read the entire thread don't see how that helps your position at all.   Edited to add:  In fact, I think it does the opposite.  There are about 25 comments in that thread.  Perhaps it will help if you are a bit more specific than just referring to the "bottom part of the thread".

Edited by Richard Brown
Added underlined second sentence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, George Mervosh said:

But I do respectfully disagree that Mr. Elsman's response was irrelevant.

Appreciate your respectful comment. The point, apparently not artfully made, was that this was an issue of what is recorded in the minutes rather than a motion related to voting.

As previously established, I agree with the consensus (Mr. Elsman excepted) expressed above and on the other thread regarding what can be recorded in the minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...