1. MEETING PROCEDURE MYTHS

2. Myth #1: Robert’s Rules are just a Guide: You don’t have to follow them. BZZZZZ!! Sorry, but no cigar for you! This one has to be the mother of all myths – it is completely baseless! If your bylaws provide that Robert’s Rules is your parliamentary authority, then the rules are binding. If you adopt a parliamentary authority, its rules are binding on the organization insofar as they do not conflict with the bylaws or special rules of order adopted by the organization.

3. Myth #2: Robert’s Rules establishes that it is a fundamental principle of parliamentary law that only “one question can be considered at a time.” I am not arguing. You can only consider one question at a time. The myth arises because the actual rule is often misstated: Several pending motions can actually be on the floor at one time when you include any secondary motions that may be made during the handling of a main motion. These motions can be made while another motion is pending, subject only to their particular rules of applicability and precedence. They’re added to the stack of pending motions as they’re made, and they’re voted on (or considered) one at a time, from the highest ranking back down to the lowest ranking, in their proper order.

4. EXAMPLE FOR MYTH #2: A motion is made to hire a management company to handle your on line elections. A member then moves to amend the motion in some way. While the amendment is being discussed, then someone moves to refer the motion with the amendment to a committee to report back next month. While the motion to refer is being discussed, someone moves to limit the debate on the motion to commit to ten more minutes and then take a vote.

5. Myth # 3: Presiding Officer can only vote to break a tie. This popular myth, and its variation that the chair must vote to break a tie, are more common than ants at a picnic…and it is simply not so! Robert’s Rules says that the presiding officer (if a member) votes with the other members when a vote is by ballot; but for other forms of voting, the chair’s duty To maintain the appearance of impartiality while presiding requires him to refrain from voting, except when his vote will affect the result. The myth comes about because of two misconceptions. The first misconception is based on the misunderstanding that a tie vote is not decisive. On the contrary, whenever a majority vote is required to adopt a motion a tie vote is decisive; A motion that fails to achieve the majority vote necessary to adopt it fails. If the vote is tied, the presiding officer does not need to vote unless he wants the motion to be adopted. He/she can then vote in the affirmative, and the motion passes. If the vote isn’t tied, but the affirmatives outnumber the opposition by one vote, the chair doesn’t need to vote unless he wishes the motion to fail. He can then cast a vote in the negative, creating a tie and causing the motion to fail.

6. The second misconception contributing to this myth comes from the failure to consider that the chair’s vote can also affect the outcome when the threshold for adoption is anything other than a majority. For example: if a motion requires a two-thirds vote to pass, the chair’s vote can make a difference if it causes the motion to reach (or not reach) the two-thirds threshold. In either case, the chair can vote if he/she wants to affect the result. THE CHAIR SHOULD VOTE ALONG WITH THE OTHER MEMBERS WHENEVER THE VOTE IS BY BALLOT; OTHERWISE, HE/SHE SHOULD VOTE ONLY WHEN HE/SHE WANTS TO USE HIS/HER VOTE TO AFFECT THE RESULT.