Guest ETI88ORG Posted October 20, 2010 at 05:42 AM Report Share Posted October 20, 2010 at 05:42 AM I am the President of a very small local equestrian club that is under the umbrella of a large National organization. During our most recent meeting, a vote was taken of the five board members. Three of us voted yes (including myself), one abstained and one voted against. The person who voted against is the Vice President. He made the claim after the fact that the President could not vote under parliamentary procedure. Is this correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Cisar Posted October 20, 2010 at 06:26 AM Report Share Posted October 20, 2010 at 06:26 AM I am the President of a very small local equestrian club that is under the umbrella of a large National organization. During our most recent meeting, a vote was taken of the five board members. Three of us voted yes (including myself), one abstained and one voted against. The person who voted against is the Vice President. He made the claim after the fact that the President could not vote under parliamentary procedure. Is this correct?On small boards (about a dozen or less), the chair may vote. Pge 471, lines 7-11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Schafer Posted October 20, 2010 at 08:51 AM Report Share Posted October 20, 2010 at 08:51 AM Mr. Cisar's answer is correct, unless your club's rules are different from what is in RONR.But even if the President were forbidden from voting, and we assume that the President was one of the three board members who voted for the motion, the correct count would be 2 "yes" votes and 1 "no" vote. The motion would still be adopted, if a majority vote is what is required. So I don't understand why the Vice President's concern would invalidate the vote, even if we (incorrectly) assume that he is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted October 20, 2010 at 10:05 AM Report Share Posted October 20, 2010 at 10:05 AM Is this correct?Although there are some instances where the chair should not vote (see FAQ #1), there are few instances where the chair can not vote. This appears to be neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted October 20, 2010 at 11:34 AM Report Share Posted October 20, 2010 at 11:34 AM Mr. Cisar's answer is correct, unless your club's rules are different from what is in RONR.But even if the President were forbidden from voting, and we assume that the President was one of the three board members who voted for the motion, the correct count would be 2 "yes" votes and 1 "no" vote. The motion would still be adopted, if a majority vote is what is required. So I don't understand why the Vice President's concern would invalidate the vote, even if we (incorrectly) assume that he is right.Even if a 2/3 vote was required, the motion still was adopted! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted October 20, 2010 at 02:11 PM Report Share Posted October 20, 2010 at 02:11 PM He made the claim after the fact that the President could not vote under parliamentary procedure. Is this correct?No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.