Votes After Meeting

[Guest Confused_BOD_Member]

Can BOD members who missed a meeting vote on a motion after it has been presented and voted on at the meeting? If so, how is this noted in the minutes. If not, can their position be noted in the minutes?

[hmtcastle]

Can BOD members who missed a meeting vote on a motion after it has been presented and voted on at the meeting? If so, how is this noted in the minutes. If not, can their position be noted in the minutes?

No.

[Chris Harrison]

No.

However, the member can move to Rescind or Amend the adopted motion or if the motion was defeated the member can renew the motion.

[J. J.]

Can BOD members who missed a meeting vote on a motion after it has been presented and voted on at the meeting? If so, how is this noted in the minutes. If not, can their position be noted in the minutes?

Generally the person must be present to vote. A vote cannot be cast after the result is announced.

The board may, but is not required to, permit the member to enter a statement into the minutes of how the member would have voted had he been present. Such a statement is merely a statement and has no effect on the adoption of the motion. It would technically be a question of privilege (p. 216 ff.).

It might be possible (and possibly preferable) to move to rescind the motion (see pp. 297-8 for what cannot be rescinded), if adopted or to renew the motion, if the motion was defeated.

[hmtcastle]

Generally the person must be present to vote.

Generally?

[J. J.]

Generally?

Generally. We have discussed voting apart from a meeting many times and some groups do permit various forms of absentee balloting in their bylaws. Neither case involves votes after the result is announce.

[hmtcastle]

Generally. We have discussed voting apart from a meeting many times and some groups do permit various forms of absentee balloting in their bylaws.

It just seemed like a casual way to refer to a violation of a fundamental principle of parliamentary law.

[Dan Honemann]

The board may, but is not required to, permit the member to enter a statement into the minutes of how the member would have voted had he been present. Such a statement is merely a statement and has no effect on the adoption of the motion. It would technically be a question of privilege (p. 216 ff.).

A question of privilege? I don't think so.

[Rob Elsman]

Generally the person must be present to vote. A vote cannot be cast after the result is announced.

The board may, but is not required to, permit the member to enter a statement into the minutes of how the member would have voted had he been present. Such a statement is merely a statement and has no effect on the adoption of the motion. It would technically be a question of privilege (p. 216 ff.).

It might be possible (and possibly preferable) to move to rescind the motion (see pp. 297-8 for what cannot be rescinded), if adopted or to renew the motion, if the motion was defeated.

...permit the member to enter a statement into the minutes of how the member would have voted had he been present...

As most of you know by now, were I in the chair, I would rule this kind of request to be dilatory and out of order, in the general case. It serves no legitimate parliamentary purpose.

[J. J.]

A question of privilege? I don't think so.

I can't really figure what else it would be. It seems to be related to the member's privilege as a member, though it would not be of sufficient importance to interrupt pending business. I'd go of Q and P, but a very week one.

[J. J.]

As most of you know by now, were I in the chair, I would rule this kind of request to be dilatory and out of order, in the general case. It serves no legitimate parliamentary purpose.

It can. It puts the member's on the record.

[Trina]

... I'd go of Q and P, but a very week one.

Which raises the question of what happens during week two

[J. J.]

A question of privilege? I don't think so.

I'm looking at this again and I'm hard pressed to see any real difference between treating this a Request for Any Other Privilege (p. 287) or as a Request for Any Other Privilege raised under the device of a Question of Privilege (p. 217).

[George Mervosh]

As most of you know by now, were I in the chair, I would rule this kind of request to be dilatory and out of order, in the general case. It serves no legitimate parliamentary purpose.

Yes, we know. It's a shame though, because it would waste more time slamming and overturning your never yielding position on appeal than just letting him do it in certain situations.

But you have every right to constistenly wrong on this issue

[hmtcastle]

Which raises the question of what happens during week two

You can lead a horse to the "Edit" button but you can't make him click on it.

[J. J.]

You can lead a horse to the "Edit" button but you can't make him click on it.

I was thinking of you, Most Excellent Mountcastle.

[hmtcastle]

I was thinking of you, Most Excellent Mountcastle.

Well, I certainly appreciate that someone is.

[Josh Martin]

Yes, we know. It's a shame though, because it would waste more time slamming and overturning your never yielding position on appeal than just letting him do it in certain situations.

But you have every right to constistenly wrong on this issue

Well, he did say "in the general case" this time. Certainly an assembly granting such a request implies an unusual circumstance.

[J. J.]

Well, he did say "in the general case" this time. Certainly an assembly granting such a request implies an unusual circumstance.

I don't agree. The assembly might to be asked to grant such a request very often, but I would not be too surprised that most would be granted.

I have seen these types of requests occasionally, and they are usually granted.

[Rob Elsman]

Well, he did say "in the general case" this time. Certainly an assembly granting such a request implies an unusual circumstance.

If a member wishes to discuss a motion that has already been disposed of, he should take one of the appropriate parliamentary actions that brings a motion again before the assembly. See RONR (10th ed.), pp. 72-76.

[J. J.]

If a member wishes to discuss a motion that has already been disposed of, he should take one of the appropriate parliamentary actions that brings a motion again before the assembly. See RONR (10th ed.), pp. 72-76.

The member is not discussing a motion that has already been disposed of, thought that could be done as a Request as well (p. 287, l. 29).