Voting after abstaining

[Guest Allenb]

So, we have a city council where we placed a vote, 1 member abstained.  After dealings with the county commissioners, we are discussing a re vote on the matter.  Should the person that abstained be allowed to vote on the same motion after abstaining the first vote? Is there any rules that would forbid them?

[Hieu H. Huynh]

A member has the right to vote.

[Richard Brown]

26 minutes ago, Guest Allenb said:

So, we have a city council where we placed a vote, 1 member abstained.  After dealings with the county commissioners, we are discussing a re vote on the matter.  Should the person that abstained be allowed to vote on the same motion after abstaining the first vote? Is there any rules that would forbid them?

Doing a "re-vote" is normally permissible only under limited circumstances, usually when there has been a motion to reconsider the previous vote.  Such a motion  is  subject to time limits.

Was the original motion adopted?   If so, a  re-vote is out of order unless the motion can be reconsidered.  Since the vote was taken at a previous meeting, the motion  to reconsider would likely not be in order.  However, since this is apparently a city council, this may depend on whether each meeting is considered a separate "session".  It might also depend on your own council rules or governing ordinances and statutes.

If the motion failed, unless your rules provide otherwise, it may be "renewed" at any future meeting.  To  renew a motion means simply to make the motion again.

If the motion at issue does come back for another vote (through whatever procedure), then this member may indeed vote. 

It will help us if you can tell us by what reasoning or method it is proposed that this motion be voted on again. 

[Weldon Merritt]

35 minutes ago, Richard Brown said:

It will help us if you can tell us by what reasoning or method it is proposed that this motion be voted on again. 

What bearing would that have on whether the member is allowed to vote? If the "re-vote" (by whatever method was used) is in order, then all members (including the former abstainer) are entitled to vote. It it is not in order, then it shouldn't be consisdered at all. and no members should be voting.

[Richard Brown]

1 hour ago, Weldon Merritt said:

What bearing would that have on whether the member is allowed to vote? If the "re-vote" (by whatever method was used) is in order, then all members (including the former abstainer) are entitled to vote. It it is not in order, then it shouldn't be consisdered at all. and no members should be voting.

Oh, I agree.  I'm just curious as to the rationalization or method they plan to use to do a "re-vote".  I suspect there is an underlying misunderstanding of the motion to reconsider and when it can be used.

[Atul Kapur]

More likely, since it's a city council, they have their own rules that supersede RONR in this regard (and many others)

[Rob Elsman]

It may be that the main motion was rejected and will be renewed at a later session after consultations with the county commissioners.

[Guest Allenb]

Thank you for the responses.  It has to do with reopening the city lodging with after they were closed due to coronavirus.  We voted Yes, reopen, the county asked us to reconsider to stick to one timeline with them.  One person abstained for personal reasons on the original vote, but is now leading the charge to have another vote...

It sound like it would be a new vote, so they would be able to vote. 

Thank you again.

[Josh Martin]

31 minutes ago, Guest Allenb said:

Thank you for the responses.  It has to do with reopening the city lodging with after they were closed due to coronavirus.  We voted Yes, reopen, the county asked us to reconsider to stick to one timeline with them.  One person abstained for personal reasons on the original vote, but is now leading the charge to have another vote...

It sound like it would be a new vote, so they would be able to vote. 

I would first note that it is not proper to simply "have another vote." Under the circumstances described, since the assembly has now adopted a motion to reopen (and it seems the timeline for reconsideration has likely passed), the appropriate course of action would be to make a motion to Rescind the motion that was adopted to reopen.

In any event, yes, all members have the right to vote.

Edited May 13, 2020 at 03:28 PM by Josh Martin

[Guest Allenb]

Yes, I think that is what is happening.  I'm pretty new, so I don't know all the proper terms yet.

Thank you

[Richard Brown]

34 minutes ago, Guest Allenb said:

Thank you for the responses.  It has to do with reopening the city lodging with after they were closed due to coronavirus.  We voted Yes, reopen, the county asked us to reconsider to stick to one timeline with them.  One person abstained for personal reasons on the original vote, but is now leading the charge to have another vote...

It sound like it would be a new vote, so they would be able to vote. 

Thank you again.

Guest Allenb, you still aren't being very clear as to exactly what is going on, but it looks to me like some county official wants the city council to modify the original motion in some way, perhaps to change the timeline or date when something is to happen to match a county rule on the subject.  If that is the case, the proper motion  is to "Amend something  previously adopted".  An alternative method would be as Mr. Martin mentioned,  namely to move to rescind the previous motion and to then adopt a new one.  In either case, the member who  abstained on the previous vote may vote on this one. 

However, unless your own rules provide otherwise, it is too late to move to "Reconsider" the original motion.  If RONR is your parliamentary authority, a motion to reconsider must be made on the same day that the motion sought to be reconsidered was adopted.  The only exception is when the  session is  more than one day such as a multi-day convention..  In that case, the motion may also be made on the next day of the session.  If each meeting of your city council is considered a separate session, as is usually the case, it is too late to make a motion to reconsider.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 5/12/2020 at 8:30 PM, Guest Allenb said:

So, we have a city council where we placed a vote, 1 member abstained.  After dealings with the county commissioners, we are discussing a re vote on the matter.  Should the person that abstained be allowed to vote on the same motion after abstaining the first vote? Is there any rules that would forbid them?

There are no such prohibitions.