Fact Verses Fiction: Procedural Myths, Part 2
If you joined us last month, you may recall the June Spotlight on Polity was part one of a two-part series inspired by the popular television series “MythBusters,” a show that put popular fan theories and myths to the test using the scientific method. As promised, this month, we continue with part two of my myth busting series where I continue to take common procedural “facts” straight to the pages of Robert’s Rules of Order to see how they hold up. If you missed last month’s article, you can catch up here: https://glpby.org/polity-june-2025/ , otherwise, let’s get started!
- Abstentions count as “Yes/No” Votes.
Between the two, I think it may be more common an idea than an abstention is seen as a “no” vote rather than a “yes.” I mean if you’re in favor of something, why not vote yes? In my experience (and this may be wrong) but abstaining from a vote seems common when someone is not particularly in favor of a motion, but maybe does not have the conviction to straight out vote “no.” I’ve also seen it commonly used when someone feels a conflict of interest regarding the motion in question and wishes to remain neutral. Well, according to Roberts Rules, only the latter would be right. As stated, “to ‘abstain’ means to not vote at all, and a member who makes no response if abstentions are called for abstains just as much as one who responds to that effect.” (RONR 4:35) Additionally, “No member should vote on a question in which [they] have a direct personal or pecuniary interest not common to other members of the organization.” (RONR 45:4)
Interestingly, in our own context, when a vote is taken completely in person, only yes and no votes are called for. The moderator usually doesn’t call for abstentions during an in-person vote for the obvious reason stated above – they don’t count as votes. This is not to say they don’t matter, and a moderator can ask for any abstentions. Abstentions can influence the outcome of a vote by affecting the number of needed votes and what number of members do actually vote. Where it gets confusing is during our online/ hybrid gatherings, where the electronic vote gives options for “yes,” “no,” and “abstain.” While one could simply click the little “x” in the corner to close the box without voting, every gathering when the results are shared you see a couple of abstentions, and while they would not have affected the outcome of the vote in most cases, it’s understandable to wonder how to count them among the rest. So, there you have it, I’ll call this one is busted! Even so, while we now know that abstentions do not count as votes, I think its worth sharing this last excerpt from Robert’s Rules on the matter: “Although it is the duty of every member who has an opinion on a question to express it by [their] vote, [they] can abstain, since [they] cannot be compelled to vote.” (RONR 45:3) Simply put, while Robert’s Rules encourages everyone who can to exercise their right to vote, it also acknowledges your right not to vote.
- The Moderator must ask for old business.
This one is easy to understand how it took hold, since the category for old business and new business regularly shows up on our agendas. However, unlike new business, what Robert’s Rules refers to as “unfinished” business is actually a space to attend to official business brought over from a prior meeting or something unaddressed from earlier in the agenda. (RONR 41:21) Though we may often treat it as such which probably perpetuates this as a procedural “fact,” it is not a space for bringing up old ideas that never went anywhere. Unfinished business should already be known by the Moderator or Clerk, due to the events of prior meetings or earlier proceedings, and need not be “asked for.” Sorry everyone, I’m calling this one busted.
- Officers / Ex Officio Members can’t vote
In the case of officers, this may or may not be true. There is nothing in Robert’s Rules that says officers can’t be members of the body. Some organizations may prefer not to elect members to officer roles and can provide for this restriction in their bylaws, otherwise, Robert’s Rules gives complete autonomy to an organization regarding who they select to serve as an officer. In the case of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), our practice is typically to elect from among its membership. In fact, the Book of Order requires moderators for each council higher than the Session to be elected from among its membership (G-3.0104). Therefore, if an officer is a member of the council, whether they chose to vote or not, they do have that right. Again, officers such as Moderators or Stated Clerks (if a member, but not always the case), it is their duty to maintain the appearance of impartiality and should weigh their decision to vote in any matter with much discernment.
In the case of “Ex Officio” members, the title says it all. They are members and therefore should carry a vote. Ex Officio simply refers to how they became members, “by virtue of some office.” (RONR 49:8) An example in our polity might be that an installed pastor of a congregation becomes the moderator of the session, with voice and vote. This would be by virtue of their installed position, whereas a temporary or uninstalled pastor moderating a session would not have a vote. When it comes to Ex Officio Members, it all comes down to the bylaws or other governing documents, as unless otherwise specified by some concrete rule restricting the right to vote for certain types of members, those members would have a vote. So, I wouldn’t call this one busted, just ridiculously complicated!
- Motions don’t take effect until the minutes are approved
I don’t know how prevalent this one is, but it’s a funny one to consider if it is a widely held “fact.” As one source puts it best, “if this statement was true, you could never even have approved minutes, because minutes of one meeting wouldn’t be officially approved until the minutes of the meeting in which they were approved got approved, and those minutes wouldn’t be approved until the next meeting, and so on…you’d have a never ending wait for approved minutes!” Simply put, a motion takes effect immediately upon approval by the body, unless it provides for some other effective date. The approval of minutes are just an approval of the record of proceedings and adoption of the motions, not the approval of the motions themselves. Busted!
- A Moderator must call for nominations from the floor “three” times.
Personally, I had never heard of this “fact” before and not sure how widely believed it is. I’ve never seen it practiced in any meeting I’ve attended. Best guess it came by means of a very cautious moderator and maybe adopted as best practice somewhere. Honestly, while maybe excessive, it’s not necessarily a bad policy, as nominations should never be closed as long as there is someone who wants to make a nomination, however, it isn’t a rule set forth by Robert’s Rules, nor is the requirement to have a motion to close nominations. If no nominations are forthcoming, the Moderator can simply declare nominations closed. Safe to say, this one is busted!
So, there you have it, your next five common procedural “facts” examined, and again for most, busted. Hopefully, you found them as interesting as I did, or at the very least, something new to add to your “polity repertoire!” While this concludes our summer two-part series, stay tuned for future “Spotlights on Polity,” where I’ll continue to share helpful, and hopefully fun, polity tips that will help you live into your best Presbyterian life! Until next time, stay decent and in good order!
Rev. Dr. Brandan Eddy
Stated Clerk
