Mover of a Motion - In Conflict

[Guest Riced2]

Scenario: A member of the Board made a motion, who later abstained from the same vote as they were in conflict.  The motion was seconded, voted on and passed before the error was noted.

What would have been the appropriate steps to rectify this? Or was the resolution valid with a member in conflict making the original motion?  

[Richard Brown]

Nothing that you have told us would  cause the motion to be invalid or improperly adopted based on the rules in RONR. 

[Gary Novosielski]

On 1/10/2023 at 10:14 PM, Guest Riced2 said:

Scenario: A member of the Board made a motion, who later abstained from the same vote as they were in conflict.  The motion was seconded, voted on and passed before the error was noted.

What would have been the appropriate steps to rectify this? Or was the resolution valid with a member in conflict making the original motion?  

The resolution was properly adopted, as far as I can tell from your description.

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

What error?  What makes you think it was an error?

[puzzling]

it could be a motion to offer his business some contract,  I think under RONR he is, as member entitled to make the motion , but also he should refrain from voting about it.(as he has a interest not shared with other boardmembers in it)

 

[Rob Elsman]

RONR (12th ed.) 43:25 is clear that the maker must not speak in debate against his motion, but he is free to vote against it.

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

I am asking because the vast misunderstanding about conflict that exists that is not in RONR but people think it is.  Such as "Oh you have an opinion on this topic, you have a conflict of interest!"

[Rob Elsman]

Oh, I completely understand that people often say everything imaginable and justify it by saying it's in Robert's Rules. As Dr. Stackpole of blessed memory used to recommend, have the claimant show where.

[Richard Brown]

On 1/12/2023 at 4:26 AM, puzzling said:

it could be a motion to offer his business some contract,  I think under RONR he is, as member entitled to make the motion , but also he should refrain from voting about it.(as he has a interest not shared with other boardmembers in it)

 

That doesn't matter.  If the rules in RONR are controlling, no member can be compelled to refrain from making a motion that he might benefit from or that might result in some perceived "conflict" nor may he be compelled to abstain from voting on such a motion.   The question is whether the motion was validly adopted.  Based on what we have been told, it was.

On 1/12/2023 at 7:37 AM, Rob Elsman said:

RONR (12th ed.) 43:25 is clear that the maker must not speak in debate against his motion, but he is free to vote against it.

I don't see where we have been provided with any evidence that either of the two things you mentioned occurred.  To the contrary, the OP said the member abstained from the vote.

[Riced2]

Thanks for all the responses.  

The question should have read, "Can a member in conflict move the resolution?".  In this case the conflict was non-pecuniary in that a family member benefited non-financially from the outcome and the member noted the conflict before the vote and chose not to participate in the discussion or vote. From what I gather the member was able to move the motion. 

I should also note the nature of the business was not controversial. What transpired next was a point of order from a member as to whether the original resolution was valid.  Out of an abundance of caution, the motion was moved/seconded again by members not in conflict and was approved (the member in conflict abstained once again by their choice).

My question now is what is disclosed in the minutes?  There are technically two resolutions which are identical.   

[Dan Honemann]

The minutes should reflect exactly what happened.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 1/12/2023 at 11:51 AM, Riced2 said:

Thanks for all the responses.  

The question should have read, "Can a member in conflict move the resolution?".  In this case the conflict was non-pecuniary in that a family member benefited non-financially from the outcome and the member noted the conflict before the vote and chose not to participate in the discussion or vote. From what I gather the member was able to move the motion. 

I should also note the nature of the business was not controversial. What transpired next was a point of order from a member as to whether the original resolution was valid.  Out of an abundance of caution, the motion was moved/seconded again by members not in conflict and was approved (the member in conflict abstained once again by their choice).

My question now is what is disclosed in the minutes?  There are technically two resolutions which are identical.   

Once the discussion and vote took place, it was a little late to be objecting to who moved it.  RONR says that a person should not vote on a question in which he has "direct personal or pecuniary interest not common to other members of the organization".  It sounds like that was properly followed.   In fact, I'm not sure that a spouse benefiting qualifies as "direct".

So redoing the motion was not proper but, no harm, no foul.

[puzzling]

On 1/12/2023 at 10:05 PM, Gary Novosielski said:

Once the discussion and vote took place, it was a little late to be objecting to who moved it.  RONR says that a person should not vote on a question in which he has "direct personal or pecuniary interest not common to other members of the organization".  It sounds like that was properly followed.   In fact, I'm not sure that a spouse benefiting qualifies as "direct".

So redoing the motion was not proper but, no harm, no foul.

I agree either the above , although I could argue that the link between the member and the interest of a spouse qualifies as direct personal interest.  but as it stands it was all fine.

as to the minutes I think both motions should be recorded something like 

Mr X moved that we give the crown award to Mrs X, this motion was adopted.

Mr Y moved that we give the crown award to Mrs X, this motion was adopted.

as fas as I know it is not needed to record that Mr X did not vote on either motion.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 1/13/2023 at 7:15 AM, puzzling said:

as fas as I know it is not needed to record that Mr X did not vote on either motion.

I agree, but I would be inclined to approve such a record if Mr. X requested it.  There are circumstances where such a request is actually in the nature of a demand.