motion carried or failed?

[Guest Guest-MiniMancha]

Background: an organization composed of six memebers and the chair; all present and a motion is made, seconded and discussed. At vote time, three votes in favor; chair against and three obstain.

Did the motion carry?

[Chris Harrison]

Yes. A majority of those who voted were in favor of the motion.

[hmtcastle]

Background: an organization composed of six memebers and the chair; all present and a motion is made, seconded and discussed. At vote time, three votes in favor; chair against and three obstain.

Did the motion carry?

The vote was 3-1.

See FAQ #6.

By the way, there's no reason to separate the chair from the other members. Just say it's an organization with seven members.

[Guest Guest-MiniMancha]

The vote was 3-1.

See FAQ #6.

By the way, there's no reason to separate the chair from the other members. Just say it's an organization with seven members.

Thanks for your responses. The reason I separated them is that the Chair votes in the event of a tie but otherwise doesn't vote.

Then if I read RRoO correctly, if one abstains three for and two against, then the Chair can't vote as those voting carried the motion 3-2?

[David A Foulkes]

Thanks for your responses. The reason I separated them is that the Chair votes in the event of a tie but otherwise doesn't vote.

Then if I read RRoO correctly, if one abstains three for and two against, then the Chair can't vote as those voting carried the motion 3-2?

Not sure where you found this, but basically the Chair may vote on all motions at a meeting of a Board with about 12 members or fewer. In larger meetings, the Chair votes only when that vote will affect the result, or if voting by ballot or roll call (I think).

So, question: is this small "organization" of seven the entire organization, or is it the board of that organization? That may play in.

Also, in a 3-2 vote without the Chair voting, the Chair could vote in the negative creating a tie, which will defeat the motion, and thus affecting the result. So the Chair could vote, although there is no mandate to do so.

[hmtcastle]

The reason I separated them is that the Chair votes in the event of a tie but otherwise doesn't vote.

Well, there was no tie since, without the chair's vote, the vote was 3-0.

Then if I read RRoO correctly, if one abstains three for and two against, then the Chair can't vote as those voting carried the motion 3-2?

If the vote was 3-2, the chair could vote "no", thereby defeating a motion that would otherwise have passed.

See FAQ #1.

[Guest Guest-MiniMancha]

Not sure where you found this, but basically the Chair may vote on all motions at a meeting of a Board with about 12 members or fewer. In larger meetings, the Chair votes only when that vote will affect the result, or if voting by ballot or roll call (I think).

So, question: is this small "organization" of seven the entire organization, or is it the board of that organization? That may play in.

Also, in a 3-2 vote without the Chair voting, the Chair could vote in the negative creating a tie, which will defeat the motion, and thus affecting the result. So the Chair could vote, although there is no mandate to do so.

Yes. there are only seven voting members in the organization. By history, the chair votes in the event of a tie, otherwise doesn't cast a vote.

[David A Foulkes]

Yes. there are only seven voting members in the organization. By history, the chair votes in the event of a tie, otherwise doesn't cast a vote.

Well, you're pretty close here. In meetings of the general membership, the chair may vote when done by ballot, or (in other voting methods) when that vote will affect the result. It may be to break a tie, but it also may be to cause a tie, or in the case of a 2/3 vote requirement, to cause the motion to pass or fail.

So, if 3 ayes, 2 nos and 1 abstain, the chair can vote no to cause the tie and the motion to fail.

If (in a 2/3 vote) 4 ayes, 2 nos, the chair can vote no to cause the motion to fail (4 ayes 3 nos now)

Or (in a 2/3 vote) if 3 ayes, 2 nos and 1 abstain, the chair could vote aye and cause the motion to pass.

Additionally, when custom ("history") is in conflict with the parliamentary rules or other governing documents (bylaws, etc) and someone raises a Point of Order with regard to that, the custom "falls to the ground" and the organization must comply with the "proper" rules unless a special rule of order is adopted to maintain the custom. See page 17 for more on this point.

By the way, you do have bylaws (or similar) which subscribe to RONR as the parliamentary authority, riiiiiiggghht?

ETA:

... At vote time, three votes in favor; chair against and three obstain.

Yes. there are only seven voting members in the organization. By history, the chair votes in the event of a tie, otherwise doesn't cast a vote.

By the way, why did the chair vote (against)? There was no tie!

[Guest dan]

Yes. there are only seven voting members in the organization. By history, the chair votes in the event of a tie, otherwise doesn't cast a vote.

I suggest "history" should be irrelevant. Either follow RONR or establish another rule -- and follow that rule.