cell phone vote

[Guest pete2631]

Can a board member be allowed to vote via cell phone when by-laws and rules of order established do not address the issue? And not vote was taken prior to the meeting setting ground rules to allow the vote to count. Should the entire topic have to be reconsidered at the next meeting?

[George Mervosh]

Can a board member be allowed to vote via cell phone when by-laws and rules of order established do not address the issue? And not vote was taken prior to the meeting setting ground rules to allow the vote to count. Should the entire topic have to be reconsidered at the next meeting?

No.

And you couldn't have agreed to it ahead of time anyway, when the rules in RONR apply.

RONR, pp. 408-409

[Guest pete2631]

No.

And you couldn't have agreed to it ahead of time anyway, when the rules in RONR apply.

RONR, pp. 408-409

Does the vote have to retaken on that matter?

[George Mervosh]

Does the vote have to retaken on that matter?

If his absentee vote affected the outcome, yes, otherwise no. RONR, p. 244 (d)

[Dan Honemann]

If his absentee vote affected the outcome, yes, otherwise no. RONR, p. 244 (d)

Since it is known what his vote was, why can't it just be ignored?

[George Mervosh]

Since it is known what his vote was, why can't it just be ignored?

Interesting question.

If he caused the motion to be adopted, the motion is null and void, or if the vote is ignored it's defeated, same net effect...... If he caused it to be defeated, by say, creating a tie or tipping the scale to the negative in a 2/3 vote, do you suggest they proceed as if the motion was adopted? I'm uncomfortable with all of this happening outside of a meeting context. You can tell me why I'm wrong whenver you get around to it.....time for happy hour and dinner

[Dan Honemann]

Interesting question.

If he caused the motion to be adopted, the motion is null and void, or if the vote is ignored it's defeated, same net effect...... If he caused it to be defeated, by say, creating a tie or tipping the scale to the negative in a 2/3 vote, do you suggest they proceed as if the motion was adopted? I'm uncomfortable with all of this happening outside of a meeting context. You can tell me why I'm wrong whenver you get around to it.....time for happy hour and dinner

I'm not suggesting that any decision can be made outside of a meeting context. I'm suggesting that if, at the meeting when the point of order is raised, the decision is to reject the absentee vote, another vote will not be necessary.

[George Mervosh]

I'm not suggesting that any decision can be made outside of a meeting context. I'm suggesting that if, at the meeting when the point of order is raised, the decision is to reject the absentee vote, another vote will not be necessary.

That's fine....I don't see it saving all that much time or effort, but sure.

[Gary Novosielski]

That's fine....I don't see it saving all that much time or effort, but sure.

Well, it would eliminate the need for another vote/election, which might be a substantial savings, depending on the requirements of holding the original one, notice requirements, etc. Or it might be insignificant.

But once it's decided whether the absentee vote was valid or not, the results of the election can simply be recalculated with, or without, that vote. Given the corrected result, the outcome, as it should have been announced originally, will immediately be known.

It might not beat a revote by a lot, but it will always be faster.

And there's something just Better about preserving the maximum amount of information from the first election, rather than holding another one. For one thing, it avoids ill will among people who voted in the first but were unable to vote in the second.

[George Mervosh]

Dan (and anyone else) -

Let's say at the next meeting when they rule the point of order well taken and the motion null and void, Mr. Cellphone is present.

Would it be proper to ignore the absentee vote that happened earlier and thereby exclude him from the decision making process on the now null and void motion while he's sitting there?

I think the motion should be ruled null and void (if the motion was adopted and Mr. Cellphone's vote affected the outcome) and a new motion should be made and voted on by those present, including him if he's there.

[Gary Novosielski]

Dan (and anyone else) -

Let's say at the next meeting when they rule the point of order well taken and the motion null and void, Mr. Cellphone is present.

Would it be proper to ignore the absentee vote that happened earlier and thereby exclude him from the decision making process on the now null and void motion while he's sitting there?

I think the motion should be ruled null and void (if the motion was adopted and Mr. Cellphone's vote affected the outcome) and a new motion should be made and voted on by those present, including him if he's there.

Ah, but let's say that at that meeting with Mr. C. present, two other members, Messrs. P. and V. who were present and voting at the last meeting are now not present. Why should C's vote count, while P. and V.'s votes no longer count? After all, P. and V. obeyed the rules in every particular, while C. did not. He should not be rewarded while the others are penalized.

[George Mervosh]

Ah, but let's say that at that meeting with Mr. C. present, two other members, Messrs. P. and V. who were present and voting at the last meeting are now not present. Why should C's vote count, while P. and V.'s votes no longer count? After all, P. and V. obeyed the rules in every particular, while C. did not. He should not be rewarded while the others are penalized.

He absolutely should Gary......and you and I both know it doesn't matter who is present......as long as they're present when decisions are made. The whole assembly made a mistake, and whomever is at the next meeting will fix it......

[Gary Novosielski]

He absolutely should Gary......and you and I both know it doesn't matter who is present......as long as they're present when decisions are made. The whole assembly made a mistake, and whomever is at the next meeting will fix it......

I agree with Dan that if enough information is available to merely recalculate the result of the vote, a new vote is not needed. It appears to have been the chair who made the mistake. Although the assembly did not catch him at the time, the chair is has a greater burden to know and enforce the rules. Those members then present, who voted properly in good faith, should have their votes preserved if at all possible.

I have no problem holding a re-vote if necessary, such as if insufficient information were available to determine how the absentee voted, but that's not the case here. We know exactly what the outcome would have been had the chair ruled correctly. I see nothing wrong with correcting the existing vote if possible, rather than ordering a new one. In fact, if there is a choice, I think it's the better one.

[George Mervosh]

I wonder if Dan agrees with Dan..

[Gary Novosielski]

I wonder if Dan agrees with Dan..

Perhaps more often than I do.

But more likely than not--although I guess it might depend on how much he fears his own wrath. At least if he disagrees with himself, they can't both be wrong.

[Dan Honemann]

Perhaps more often than I do.

But more likely than not--although I guess it might depend on how much he fears his own wrath. At least if he disagrees with himself, they can't both be wrong.

Well, we know why Mr. Cellphone's vote was null and void, but, if the motion was adopted without it, why would the motion be null and void?

[Gary Novosielski]

Well, we know why Mr. Cellphone's vote was null and void, but, if the motion was adopted without it, why would the motion be null and void?

Well, it wouldn't, if his vote would not have affected the outcome.

I was considering what might happen if his vote had been the deciding vote, either to adopt or to reject. If we knew for sure that was not the case, I missed it.

Without that factor, the point of order would be moot.

[George Mervosh]

Well, we know why Mr. Cellphone's vote was null and void, but, if the motion was adopted without it, why would the motion be null and void?

Well, it wouldn't, if his vote would not have affected the outcome.

I was considering what might happen if his vote had been the deciding vote, either to adopt or to reject. If we knew for sure that was not the case, I missed it.

Without that factor, the point of order would be moot.

Right, I thought I said that in my earlier reply........oh, I see I did

[Dan Honemann]

Right, I thought I said that in my earlier reply........oh, I see I did

My response assumed that Mr. Cellphone's vote did affect the outcome.