Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Either-Or Motions


Guest S Sherwood

Recommended Posts

Is it a violation of Robert's Rules to vote between two options the same way you vote between two candidates?

We know the status quo is not an option, so we need to decide between two courses of action.

Can this be done?

Yes. - It is no violation to have two options. Or more.

Example:

"The site of next year's convention shall be in the city of ____ [vote for one].

(a.) New Orleans

(b.) Dallas

Just like an election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this just like voting in an election? Seems more like creating and filling blanks to me. To take Kim Goldsworthy's example and expand a bit:

Let's say that one person makes a motion: "That the site of next year's convention shall be in the city of _____." Next, the chair will ask for suggestions to "fill the blank." It's done in the same way as nominations for an election. For this example, let's say that one person suggests New Orleans, and another suggests Dallas. When the chair asks for more suggestions, no one has any.

Then, shouldn't the chair bring for a vote which of the suggestions will fill the blank? If you take the vote by ballot, then you just write the choice you want, like an election. If one of the choices gets a majority of the votes, it is selected.

If the vote is done by voice, show of hands or rising vote (to stand), the chair asks, "All those in favor of filling the blank with New Orleans, say 'aye'. . . . All those opposed, say 'no'." If it gets a majority, New Orleans is selected. If not, then the chair asks the same yes-or-no question for Dallas. This goes until some choice gets a majority.

But even when you get a majority on a choice, you still haven't decided the main motion. For this example, let's say that New Orleans did not get a majority, but Dallas did. Now, the main motion is, "That the site of next year's convention shall be in the city of Dallas." This can still be debated. When the group is ready for the vote, then the chair says, "The question is on the adoption of the motion 'That the site of next year's convention shall be in the city of Dallas.' All those in favor, say 'aye'. . . ." And so on.

Is this the way that it should work, according to RONR? Or have I made it more complicated than it needs to be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this just like voting in an election? Seems more like creating and filling blanks to me. To take Kim Goldsworthy's example and expand a bit:

Let's say that one person makes a motion: "That the site of next year's convention shall be in the city of _____." Next, the chair will ask for suggestions to "fill the blank." It's done in the same way as nominations for an election. For this example, let's say that one person suggests New Orleans, and another suggests Dallas. When the chair asks for more suggestions, no one has any.

Then, shouldn't the chair bring for a vote which of the suggestions will fill the blank? If you take the vote by ballot, then you just write the choice you want, like an election. If one of the choices gets a majority of the votes, it is selected.

If the vote is done by voice, show of hands or rising vote (to stand), the chair asks, "All those in favor of filling the blank with New Orleans, say 'aye'. . . . All those opposed, say 'no'." If it gets a majority, New Orleans is selected. If not, then the chair asks the same yes-or-no question for Dallas. This goes until some choice gets a majority.

But even when you get a majority on a choice, you still haven't decided the main motion. For this example, let's say that New Orleans did not get a majority, but Dallas did. Now, the main motion is, "That the site of next year's convention shall be in the city of Dallas." This can still be debated. When the group is ready for the vote, then the chair says, "The question is on the adoption of the motion 'That the site of next year's convention shall be in the city of Dallas.' All those in favor, say 'aye'. . . ." And so on.

Is this the way that it should work, according to RONR? Or have I made it more complicated than it needs to be?

"When the blank is filled, the chair must immediately state the question on the adoption of the completed motion." (RONR 10th Ed. p. 159 ll. 23-25)

Sounds like what you're talking about, yes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it a violation of Robert's Rules to vote between two options the same way you vote between two candidates? We know the status quo is not an option, so we need to decide between two courses of action. Can this be done?

What, exactly, do you mean by "We know the status quo is not an option..."

If a determination is being made as to where to hold the next annual meeting, then the matter will be handled as in the case of an election of an officer. The annual meeting must be held someplace. Holding it nowhere is not an option.

However, in most instances there is the option of doing nothing. When this is the case, a motion needs to be made to do something, and this motion is then subject to amendment under the regular rules. Sometimes it will be appropriate to resort to the device of filing blanks, but in such a case, deciding what will fill the blank is not the last decision to be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a determination is being made as to where to hold the next annual meeting, then the matter will be handled as in the case of an election of an officer. The annual meeting must be held someplace. Holding it nowhere is not an option.

Sometimes it will be appropriate to resort to the device of filing blanks, but in such a case, deciding what will fill the blank is not the last decision to be made.

But if filling a blank is analogous to an election, I'm confused as to why the selection of the blank filler is not the last decision to be made since, in the case of an election, it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who says that filing a blank is analogous to an election?

Well, you said, "If a determination is being made as to where to hold the next annual meeting, then the matter will be handled as in the case of an election of an officer."

And somewhere over the past half dozen years (!) I got the impression that an election was a particular form of filling the blank.

But I'm happy to learn that an election is not analogous to filling a blank (or vice versa) and that filling a blank is just a particular method of perfecting a motion which then needs to be voted on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you said, "If a determination is being made as to where to hold the next annual meeting, then the matter will be handled as in the case of an election of an officer."

And somewhere over the past half dozen years (!) I got the impression that an election was a particular form of filling the blank.

But I'm happy to learn that an election is not analogous to filling a blank (or vice versa) and that filling a blank is just a particular method of perfecting a motion which then needs to be voted on.

You were right; you are confused -- totally confused. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this just like voting in an election? Seems more like creating and filling blanks to me. To take Kim Goldsworthy's example and expand a bit:

Let's say that one person makes a motion: "That the site of next year's convention shall be in the city of _____." Next, the chair will ask for suggestions to "fill the blank." It's done in the same way as nominations for an election. For this example, let's say that one person suggests New Orleans, and another suggests Dallas. When the chair asks for more suggestions, no one has any.

Then, shouldn't the chair bring for a vote which of the suggestions will fill the blank? If you take the vote by ballot, then you just write the choice you want, like an election. If one of the choices gets a majority of the votes, it is selected.

If the vote is done by voice, show of hands or rising vote (to stand), the chair asks, "All those in favor of filling the blank with New Orleans, say 'aye'. . . . All those opposed, say 'no'." If it gets a majority, New Orleans is selected. If not, then the chair asks the same yes-or-no question for Dallas. This goes until some choice gets a majority.

But even when you get a majority on a choice, you still haven't decided the main motion. For this example, let's say that New Orleans did not get a majority, but Dallas did. Now, the main motion is, "That the site of next year's convention shall be in the city of Dallas." This can still be debated. When the group is ready for the vote, then the chair says, "The question is on the adoption of the motion 'That the site of next year's convention shall be in the city of Dallas.' All those in favor, say 'aye'. . . ." And so on.

Is this the way that it should work, according to RONR? Or have I made it more complicated than it needs to be?

Well, the example you use isn't very good, since as Mr. Honemann said, the convention needs to be held somewhere. In cases where the assembly must make a decision, when one of the choices has received a majority, the matter is settled. In such cases, the chair would usually assume the motion and begin taking suggestions. An election for an officer position is really a special case of this, as the assembly has an obligation to elect the officers called for in the Bylaws. Just like you can't decide not to have a President next year, you can't decide not to have the annual convention next year.

On the other hand, let's use the classic barn painting example. A member moves to paint the barn red. Other members start suggesting other colors. The chair suggests that a blank be created, and the procedure for filling blanks is used. Eventually the assembly settles on blue, so the motion before the assembly is "To paint the barn blue." Since the assembly may decide not to paint the barn at all, this motion must still be voted on.

I'm uncertain which is the proper procedure to use here as I don't know if "the status quo is not an option" is a fact or simply the original poster's opinion.

I hope this clears things up for you and Mr. Mountcastle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, Mr. Martin. That clears it up nicely for me. The key is whether the assembly must make a decision or not. If so, then once the blank is filled (or a person is elected for an office), the matter is done. If it is possible that the assembly not take any action or make any decision, then the motion must be put for a vote after the blank is filled.

Is this principle noted anywhere in RONR? If not, it might be a good thing to add to the impending 11th edition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the main reasons an assembly would have to do something would be because it is required by the Bylaws or applicable law, and I think it's already fairly clear those must be followed. (RONR, 10th ed., pgs. 254-255)

In these instances, the significant fact, from a parliamentary point of view, is that the assembly has already decided that it will do whatever it is that it is now engaged in doing. For instance, it has already decided that it will elect certain officers and hold certain meetings when it adopted bylaws saying that it would.

Essentially the same thing happens if an assembly adopts a motion containing a blank before filling the blank (RONR, 10th ed., p. 159-160), or adopts an incomplete motion to refer something to a committee (RONR, 10th ed., p. 165-167).

And so, although it cannot properly be said that “filing a blank is analogous to an election”, I think it can properly be said that an election is analogous to filing a blank in a motion that has already been adopted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What, exactly, do you mean by "We know the status quo is not an option..."

If a determination is being made as to where to hold the next annual meeting, then the matter will be handled as in the case of an election of an officer. The annual meeting must be held someplace. Holding it nowhere is not an option.

However, in most instances there is the option of doing nothing. When this is the case, a motion needs to be made to do something, and this motion is then subject to amendment under the regular rules. Sometimes it will be appropriate to resort to the device of filing blanks, but in such a case, deciding what will fill the blank is not the last decision to be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What, exactly, do you mean by "We know the status quo is not an option..."

If a determination is being made as to where to hold the next annual meeting, then the matter will be handled as in the case of an election of an officer. The annual meeting must be held someplace. Holding it nowhere is not an option.

However, in most instances there is the option of doing nothing. When this is the case, a motion needs to be made to do something, and this motion is then subject to amendment under the regular rules. Sometimes it will be appropriate to resort to the device of filing blanks, but in such a case, deciding what will fill the blank is not the last decision to be made.

I serve as the chair of our convention's finance committee. Our finance committee submits a report each year to the convention for approval. One of the recommendations we would like to put in this year's report is that the question of whether to liquidate a property or to begin funding its maintenance. Currently we own a property which is losing value, function, and safety due to lack of maintenance. We would like to include a recommendation in our report that the convention vote by ballot whether to liquidate the property and reduce the annual assessment paid by member chapters OR to continue to ownership of the property and increase the annual assessment to cover maintenance. (Exact numbers are included in the recommendation).

Can we do this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I serve as the chair of our convention's finance committee. Our finance committee submits a report each year to the convention for approval. One of the recommendations we would like to put in this year's report is that the question of whether to liquidate a property or to begin funding its maintenance. Currently we own a property which is losing value, function, and safety due to lack of maintenance. We would like to include a recommendation in our report that the convention vote by ballot whether to liquidate the property and reduce the annual assessment paid by member chapters OR to continue to ownership of the property and increase the annual assessment to cover maintenance. (Exact numbers are included in the recommendation).

Can we do this?

Well, you can do it if you get away with it, but it seems to me to be clearly improper. smile.gif

Your committee should propose adoption of a resolution setting forth whatever course of action it believes to be in the best interests of your organization, and then let the convention work its will.

(This all assumes that the rules in RONR control the matter and that you do not have any customized rules which are relevant.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope this clears things up for you and Mr. Mountcastle.

And so, although it cannot properly be said that “filing a blank is analogous to an election”, I think it can properly be said that an election is analogous to filing a blank in a motion that has already been adopted.

Thanks to both. I appreciate the follow-up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...