"RONR" is the standard abbreviation parliamentarians use to cite Henry M. Robert III and others, Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, 11th ed. (Da Capo Press, 2011). The standard citation to particular pages and lines is "RONR (11th ed. [for ‘edition’]), p. or pp. [for ‘page’ or ‘pages’], l. or ll. [for ‘line’ or ‘lines’]."

CAUTION:
The answers given here to the questions presented are based upon the rules contained in Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised. These rules are, in effect, default rules; that is to say, they govern only if there are no contrary provisions in any federal, state, or other law applicable to the society, or in the society's bylaws, or in any special rules of order that the society has adopted. This fact must always be kept in mind when reading any of the answers given.

These questions are based on queries repeatedly received on the Question and Answer Forum. The material here is derived from Chapter 13 of Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised in Brief.

Q: In several of the answers it was stated that if the ByLaws specify voting by mail in ballots, then that is how voting should be done; no exceptions. Does that include an uncontested election?

A: Not if your bylaws say it doesn't:
 

Professional Registered Parliamentarian

Location St. Paul, MN

Posted Yesterday, 08:04 PM

Below are our ByLaws on voting for Directors. In several of the answers it was stated that if the ByLaws specify voting by mail in ballots, then that is how voting should be done; no exceptions. Does that include an uncontested election?

 Q: "In the event of an uncontested election, no ballot will be prepared and the President will declare the candidates elected at the Annual General Meeting."

A: Yes, unless the Bylaws provide otherwise (and it seems that they do).

Q: Four seats were up, the four Directors said they want to continue in their office; and the Nominating Committee did not proceed to look for nominees. Is this the correct way a nominating committee works?

A: In the absence of any rules on the subject or instructions from the parent assembly, it is up to the nominating committee's discretion how to conduct its business.

Q: Also, there is nothing in the ByLaws about nominations from the floor, can nominations from the floor be made for those uncontested seats?

It would seem not. Your Bylaws require nomination by mail, and your Bylaws specify that no ballot shall be prepared in the event of an uncontested election.

-Josh Martin, PRP

Q: And if DML wanted to make a nomination from the floor, but the President happily sits in the Chair, and no ballot is prepared, and DML is unhappy with this, what advice do you offer DML?

A: Well, in the future, it would be best for members to make nominations by mail as required by the Bylaws. It may also be wise to amend the Bylaws to change the method for electing the nominating committee. RONR recommends that the President should not appoint that committee.

At this point... I suppose the rules could be suspended to permit members to make additional nominations, which I believe would then trigger a mail-in ballot since the election would then be contested. This would require a 2/3 vote.

Q: If the President never allowed the opportunity to make nominations, and never allowed an election, and two meetings go by, what would you suggest to DML?

A: I'd recommend FAQ #20* at that point. If the Secretary and Nominating Committee were also complicit in this (which may be the case, considering that they're involved in the process of receiving nominations), then I'd recommend disciplinary action against them as well.

*Question # 20:
How can we get rid of officers we don't like before their term is up?

Answer:
It depends. If the bylaws just state a fixed term for the officer, such as "two years," or if they say the officer serves for a specified term "and until [the officer's] successor is elected" (or words to that effect), then the group must use formal disciplinary proceedings, which involve the appointment of an investigating committee, preferral of charges, and the conduct of a formal trial. The procedure is complex and should be undertaken only after a careful review of Chapter XX of RONR.

On the other hand, if the bylaws state a term for the office but add "or until [the officer's] successor is elected," or contain other wording explicitly indicating that the officer may be removed before the term expires, then the officer can be removed from office by a two-thirds vote, by a majority vote when previous notice has been given, or by a vote of the majority of the entire membership -- any one of which will suffice. A successor may thereafter be elected for the remainder of the term.

Of course, if the bylaws themselves establish a procedure for removal from office, that procedure must be followed. [RONR (11th ed.), pp. 653-54.]

　~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Other questions and answers.

Question 14:
How can I get an item on the agenda for a meeting?

Answer:
For a proposed agenda to become the official agenda for a meeting, it must be adopted by the assembly at the outset of the meeting. At the time that an agenda is presented for adoption, it is in order for any member to move to amend the proposed agenda by adding any item that the member desires to add, or by proposing any other change.

It is wrong to assume, as many do, that the president "sets the agenda." It is common for the president to prepare a proposed agenda, but that becomes binding only if it is adopted by the full assembly, perhaps after amendments as just described. [RONR (11th ed.), p. 372, ll. 24-35; see also p. 16 of RONRIB.]

　Question 4:
In determining the result of a vote, what constitutes a majority?

Answer:
The word "majority" in this context means, simply, more than half. The use of any other definition, such as 50 percent plus one, is apt to cause problems. Suppose in voting on a motion 17 votes are cast, 9 in favor and 8 opposed. Fifty percent of the votes cast is 8 1/2, so that 50 percent plus one would be 9 1/2. Under such an erroneous definition of a majority, one might say that the motion was not adopted because it did not receive 50 percent plus one of the votes cast, although it was, quite clearly, passed by a majority vote. [RONR (11th ed.), p. 400; see also p. 66 of RONRIB.]

Question 5:
Can we round to the nearest number in computing the result of a vote? For example, since two thirds of 101 is 67.33..., will 67 affirmative votes out of 101 votes cast meet the requirement of a two-thirds vote?

Answer:
No. The requirement of a two-thirds vote means at least two thirds. As a consequence, nothing less will do. If 101 votes are cast, 67 affirmative votes are not at least two thirds. They are less than two thirds, and will not suffice. [RONR (11th ed.), p. 401.]

Question 6:
Do abstention votes count?

Answer:
The phrase "abstention votes" is an oxymoron, an abstention being a refusal to vote. To abstain means to refrain from voting, and, as a consequence, there can be no such thing as an "abstention vote."

In the usual situation, where either a majority vote or a two-thirds vote is required, abstentions have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the vote since what is required is either a majority or two thirds of the votes cast. On the other hand, if the vote required is a majority or two thirds of the members present, or a majority or two thirds of the entire membership, an abstention will have the same effect as a "no" vote. Even in such a case, however, an abstention is not a vote and is not counted as a vote. [RONR (11th ed.), p. 400, ll. 7-12; p. 401, ll. 8-11; p. 403, ll. 13-24; see also p. 66 of RONRIB.)

Question 9:
Isn't it true that a member who has a conflict of interest with respect to a motion cannot vote on the motion?

Answer:
Under the rules in RONR, no member can be compelled to refrain from voting simply because it is perceived that he or she may have some "conflict of interest" with respect to the motion under consideration. If a member has a direct personal or pecuniary (monetary) interest in a motion under consideration not common to other members, the rule in RONR is that he should not vote on such a motion, but even then he or she cannot be compelled to refrain from voting. [RONR (11th ed.), p. 407, ll. 21-31.]