Unanimous Consent To Replace An Undesired Vote?

[RSW]

The following is from a "club constitution", which is effectively incorporated by reference in the Bylaws of the organization:

Quote

The applicant shall be declared elected to individual membership upon the favorable vote of at least a majority of the active individual members of this club present and voting at a business meeting of the club membership.

It's believed by some members that the process of voting people in is undesirable, for reasons that don't matter for our purposes (i.e. not procedural). The bylaws require it, as noted above. In such a situation, the vote is almost always a formality. I don't know that I've *ever* seen anybody get rejected. Given that the bylaws provide no voting procedure for anything other than specific elected offices (i.e. "not applicants for membership"), could a member be put forth and approved by unanimous consent?

I feel like the answer should be "yes", but I'm wondering if "present and voting" and/or "elected" throw in a monkey wrench that I'm not catching.

Edited April 8, 2021 at 04:17 PM by RSW

[George Mervosh]

Unless a vote by ballot is required, the use of unanimous consent is fine, especially since you note the vote is almost always a formality.  If anyone objects a regular vote is taken.  Present and voting is the default in RONR.  

Edited April 8, 2021 at 04:23 PM by George Mervosh

[RSW]

23 minutes ago, George Mervosh said:

Unless a vote by ballot is required, the use of unanimous consent is fine

Is that generally the principle? That unanimous consent can be used for pretty much any vote that doesn't specify a particular method (like balloting)?

I.e. if there were a generally-agreed-upon amendment to the bylaws that had a specific requirement for passing like "4/5 of the membership", as long as the requirement were otherwise satisfied by the meeting (4/5 of the membership were present) you could put the question in the form of unanimous consent?

[George Mervosh]

7 minutes ago, RSW said:

Is that generally the principle? That unanimous consent can be used for pretty much any vote that doesn't specify a particular method (like balloting)?

I.e. if there were a generally-agreed-upon amendment to the bylaws that had a specific requirement for passing like "4/5 of the membership", as long as the requirement were otherwise satisfied by the meeting (4/5 of the membership were present) you could put the question in the form of unanimous consent?

Yes to both questions, but it's really designed for something where there seems to be no opposition and/or matters of little importance.  See RONR (12th ed.), 4:58-4:63, especially the first and last paragraphs.

Edited April 8, 2021 at 04:53 PM by George Mervosh

[Josh Martin]

1 hour ago, RSW said:

Is that generally the principle? That unanimous consent can be used for pretty much any vote that doesn't specify a particular method (like balloting)?

I concur with Mr. Mervosh and would add that even if a particular method is specified in the rule, such a rule generally may be suspended - a ballot vote is an exception in this regard. A rule requiring a voice vote, for example, could be suspended. So unanimous consent could still work in that case.

[Weldon Merritt]

51 minutes ago, Josh Martin said:

even if a particular method is specified in the rule, such a rule generally may be suspended - a ballot vote is an exception in this regard.

Any ballot vote? Certainly that is tree for the election of officers, but I'm not so sure that it's true for any other ballot vote that my be specified in a rule. At least I don't recall any such prohibition except for officer elections.

[Josh Martin]

1 hour ago, Weldon Merritt said:

Any ballot vote? Certainly that is tree for the election of officers, but I'm not so sure that it's true for any other ballot vote that my be specified in a rule. At least I don't recall any such prohibition except for officer elections.

While requirements of this nature arise most frequently in connection with the election of officers, the rule does not appear to be limited in that respect.

"When the bylaws require a vote to be taken by ballot, this requirement cannot be suspended—even by a unanimous vote—so as to take the vote by a nonsecret method." RONR (12th ed.) 45:20

Edited April 8, 2021 at 08:44 PM by Josh Martin

[Weldon Merritt]

27 minutes ago, Josh Martin said:

"When the bylaws require a vote to be taken by ballot, this requirement cannot be suspended—even by a unanimous vote—so as to take the vote by a nonsecret method." RONR (12th ed.) 45:20

That does seem clear enough. I was thinking that the rule appeared in the article on elections. I should have taken the time to look it up.

[Richard Brown]

I agree with Mr. Martin that a bylaw requirement for a ballot vote cannot be suspended.... regardless of whether the vote is for an election of an officer or for something else.   I have wondered about the same thing in the past, and after researching it came to the same conclusion as Mr. Martin. 

[RSW]

6 hours ago, Josh Martin said:

I concur with Mr. Mervosh and would add that even if a particular method is specified in the rule, such a rule generally may be suspended 

In this case though you'd be talking about seeking unanimous consent to *suspend the rule* in order to allow the different voting method....correct?

Or are you saying you'd just allow the rule to effectively be ignored?

[Josh Martin]

11 hours ago, RSW said:

In this case though you'd be talking about seeking unanimous consent to *suspend the rule* in order to allow the different voting method....correct?

Yes, that's correct. The motion to suspend the rules can contain multiple motions, however, so a single request for unanimous consent could be used both to suspend the requirement and also to adopt the underlying motion.

[J. J.]

I agree with Mr. Martin as well.  A ballot vote requirement, for anything, creates the right to privacy in voting. 

[Guest Puzzling]

Puzzling about: can a ballot votes be replaced by another secret vote (black balls or other methods that gives privacy  to the voters)

 

[Weldon Merritt]

17 minutes ago, Guest Puzzling said:

Puzzling about: can a ballot votes be replaced by another secret vote (black balls or other methods that gives privacy  to the voters)

 

I think those methods would fall within the definition of a "ballot." See 45:18n3.

[Josh Martin]

54 minutes ago, Guest Puzzling said:

Puzzling about: can a ballot votes be replaced by another secret vote (black balls or other methods that gives privacy  to the voters)

Yes, the definition of "ballot vote" in the 12th edition appears to include more than just paper ballots.

Exactly what methods will be suitable will depend somewhat on the nature of the question being voted on. In an election for office, the method will need to allow for the option of "write-in" votes, unless the bylaws prohibit such votes. In a simple "yes/no" vote, that would not be a concern.

"Voting by ballot (also known as secret ballot) is used when secrecy of the members’ votes is desired. A ballot vote is a vote taken by instruments, such as slips of paper or electronic devices, by which members can indicate their choices without revealing how individual members have voted. On a ballot vote in an election or other vote involving multiple possible choices, members are able to write in or fill in a vote for any eligible person or choice and are not confined to voting for or against candidates that appear on the ballot." RONR (12th ed.) 45:18

"In some organizations—particularly secret societies—the use of black and white balls, deposited in a box out of sight of all but the voter, with a white ball signifying a yes vote and a black one a no vote, may be directed as a method of balloting. This method is used principally on voting on the admission of candidates to membership where one or very few negative votes are to be sufficient to cause a candidate’s rejection. This custom, however, is apparently declining." RONR (12th ed.) 45:18n3