Search the Community

Say the officers of an organization are a president, vice-president, secretary, and treasurer, listed in that order in the by-laws and, per RONR, elected in that order. However, following several rounds of balloting for vice-president, it becomes clear that the vice-presidential election will take much longer than expected, posing the risk that quorum will be lost (as members leave as the night drags on) before the last two elections can take place. Would it be in order to suspend the rules and elect the secretary and treasurer before the vice-president?

My golf association is revising our bylaws and the subject of electronic voting came up. The discussion centered around utilizing some kind of technology platform designed for this process only in the annual election of officers. Currently, our nominations committee comes up with a slate (1 candidate per position), then we can take nominations from the floor at our September meeting. Then we have the election at the October meeting. We currently allow absentee voting for the election of officers only. The idea around electronic voting is that we could announce the slate and take nominations from the floor at the September meeting, and then announce a time window for members to cast electronic ballots from wherever they may be. Then simply announce the results at the October meeting or even by posting if we choose to do away with the October meeting altogether. Are there any reasons this would be a good idea? a bad idea?

Our homeowners association uses cumulative voting and also allows for voting by proxy. For the election of board members, an association meeting is required. Quorum is a majority of owners by percentage of common interests. Every year at least three seats on the board are open; there are a total of nine seats. To be elected, a board member must have the majority of votes. This year, we have three open seats and six candidates. If 51% of owners are present in person or by proxy and satisfy the quorum requirements, then is 3 (seats) x 51 (percent present) equal to the number of total possible votes? What is the threshold that a candidate must meet to be seated? More than (3 x 51) divided by 2, or more than 76.5? If not, what is your calculation please? Since only one candidate can have the majority of votes, does this process then require at least two more re-votes to fill the remaining two seats, assuming that a candidate was seated in the first vote?

I recently joined a new volunteer fire department. I have been a member less than a year. I used to be in abother department for 13 years. We have some well detailed but somewhat cumbersome rules. However it appears as our by laws were violated about 6 months ago but nobody raised a point of order at the time. I am wondering if it is too late to do so. We have two types of officers, executive and operational. The executive side runs the organization and the operational side commands at emergencies. There are various requirements for operational officers that increase with rank. It is the job of the executive officers to determine that all nominees for operational office are qualified. In May a member was nominated for lieutenant, the executive board made no objection to the nomination. In June when the elections were about to be held the executive board was asked about qualifications for a different nominee for a different lieutenant position. Their reply was that they had not met with the Chief to get the information they needed and thus they had no way of telling who was or was not qualified. Both of those two nominees were running unopposed so the presiding officer said that there was no point in delaying their election. Both of those nominees were elected, by the secretary casting one ballot. An objection was raised from the floor about another candidate for lieutenant not having one qualification. He was questioned abut this by the presiding officer and it was determined that he could not be nominated for that position. Now it turns out that the first member I wrote about also lacked a qualification for office, although a different one. It also looks like several members and officers on both the executive and operational sides knew about this issue. I was not a voting member at the time so I could not bring it up. Is it too late to bring up this problem, next month which will be 6 months into a 1 year term? I have asked some other members but everyone seems to think that if the membership voted than the election has to stand even though the member was never qualified to run in the first place.

Where if any does the Election of Officers come to playon the Agenda? We are not sure if it is Unfinished Business or New Business. Our By-laws doesn't address this.

Can a person be nominated for a position that they do not hold all the qualifications for, as long as they will meet said qualifications prior to taking office, should they win he election.

Hello, I just found this group and this is my first post so please forgive me if I don't do it quite right. I am an officer of the American Belgian Hare Club. Our breed club is one of many under the American Rabbit Breeders Association. We are a National breed club which recently incorporated as a 501 (a) not for profit organization in IL. As a breed club we believed that whatever wasn't contained in our C & BL was covered by ARBA. ARBA does not permit youth to vote. We as a breed club have never had our youth vote since forming the club in 1972. The election for Vice-President was held. We had 157 adult members who received a ballot. The ballots were returned with a vote of 87 to 20. The losing candidate is now demanding that we declare the election null and void as he interprets our by-laws as including "all members" to mean the youth as well. We have 8 youth members. If we in fact should have included the youth in the election, the 8 votes would not affect the outcome for the losing candidate. Are we obligated to nullify and redo the election? If so would it be permissible to simply send out 8 ballots to the youth members? We are a small club with limited resources and are just a week away from our national gathering where we will hold a meeting and be able to address the by-laws to make it officially state only adults vote. Ideally we would like to call the election as 8 votes would not change the outcome. The candidate who ran for office also mentions that he believes since we did not include youth in other elections that any elections we have held since we incorporated (Dec 2016) were not valid and that we are likely not even officers of our own club. Here is his complaint (it cites our by-laws in regards to elections): Hi J******, I have verified based on the information you have provided about the youth members not being allowed to participate in the ABHC election, the ABHC election violated the ABHC Constitution and By-Laws and thus would be classified as a null and void. Moreover, if ABHC Youth members have never been allowed to vote, as you have stated, all elections that have been held since the current C&BLs were approved have been in violation of the ABHC Constitution and By-Laws will allows ALL members in good standing the right to vote in all ABHC elections as well as any other voting. The ARBA Constitution and By-Laws you have sited only governs ARBA members, in specific, ARBA youth members. The context of the referenced section even refers to ARBA dues and ARBA related activities and has nothing to do with the ABHC voting procedure. The ABHC is governed by its own ABHC Constitution and By-Laws and according to the ABHC By-Laws, Article 4 Voting Procedure, Section 5: The Secretary/Treasurer shall mail election ballots to all members in good standing. The ballots shall contain the names of all eligible candidates that meet the requirements in Article 5, Section 2. Notice the ABHC By-Laws required ballots to be mailed to ALL members in good standing, not just the adult members. The election process that has just be conducted was clearly in violation of the ABHC By-Laws as you can see from the above citation. Thus the election process was not carried out according to the ABHC Constitution and By-Laws which makes it null and void. The ARBA Constitution and By-Laws clearly states that, "all chartered clubs and associations are autonomous to the ARBA by virtue of being governed by their own constitution and by-laws (self-governing)." Furthermore you can see below that the ABHC By-Laws regarding membership, as well as Dues, does not limit the rights or privileges of ABHC Youth members with respect to voting. Article 4 Membership: Section 1: Any person of good character and reputation who is in accord with the objectives of this club may become a member by submitting an application together with the membership fee for at least one year to the Secretary-Treasurer. Section 2: The term membership shall be one year from the first day of the month in which the application was received. Section 3: The Executive Committee of this club shall have the right to reject any application for membership or renewal. Section 4: Annual Membership shall have a monetary value of less than a cent. Article 1 Dues: Section 1: The annual membership dues shall be Adult (18 and over) $7.50 Youth under 18 years of age $5.00. Foreign Surcharge for outside the US of $5.00 in US funds. Section 2: All members shall be notified by the Secretary-Treasurer thirty days prior to the expiration of their membership. Because the Election Procedure was not carried out in accordance to the ABHC Constitution and By-Laws, I am officially requesting that the election that was just conducted be set aside, an acknowledgement of the failure to hold the election in accordance with the ABHC Constitution and By-Laws be made to the membership, and a new election in accordance with the ABHC C&BLs be conducted. Since you have said that the previous election(s) did not allow the youth members to vote and would have been in violation of the ABHC Constitution and By-Laws, we may have a much bigger issue. As a public, non-profit organization registered with the State of Illinois, the club is also required to operate in accordance with its constitution and by-laws. If previous elections were held in violation of the club's constitution and by-laws, there may certainly be an issue as to whether there are any valid officers at the moment if they were elected via an election process that was also in violation of the club's constitution and by-laws. The ARBA By-Laws, Article II, Section (d) states, "It shall be the duty of the officers and directors of all ARBA-chartered clubs and associations to see that's its members abide by the constitution and by-laws of the club or association. Failure to do so may be cause for probation or loss of charter. As required by the ARBA, it is the obligation of the ABHC officers and directors to hold an election that is conducted in accordance with the ABHC Constitution and By-Laws which would mean that ALL ABHC members in good standing would be mailed a ballot and allowed to cast their vote. As both a director of the ABHC and a candidate in the most recent election, I am officially request the club begin the process of holding a new election that is in accordance with the ABHC Constitution and By-Laws. Please let me know the process, procedure, and timeframe that is going to be used for holding another ABHC election in accordance to the ABHC C&BLs. I am very concerned that yet again our club's constitution and by-laws is not being followed as required for the operation of the club. Thanks, **** I can provide more information if it would be helpful. This individual has threatened us on several occasions with personal lawsuits and we are such a tiny club we just want to do what is right and best for the club. Thank you so much.

Suppose that an assembly conducts a ballot vote for an election and no one is elected after the first round of balloting because no candidate receives a majority vote. Is debate automatically reopened?If not, is a motion to reopen debate in order? What vote is required?

Ive searched high and low. How do other conduct an election of inspectors of election? Are nominations requested by mail before the meeting? Nominations from the floor? Impromptu at the meeting? How do others conduct this? Thanks in advance!!!! Our by-laws state that the order of business at all meetings shall be as follows: (a) Roll Call (b) Proof of notice of meeting or waiver of notice (c) Reading of minutes of preceding meeting (d) Report of officers (e) Report of committees (f) Election of inspectors of election (in the event there is an election) (g) Election of Directors (in the event there is an election) (h) Unfinished business (i) New business

The relevant portion of the bylaws reads: "Candidates for Board membership shall be nominated by the Board Development Committee. Each Trustee shall be elected by the majority vote of those members present at the Annual Meeting at which the candidate is presented." There are no qualifications for Trustee other than being a member of the organization. Two questions: 1. Is it proper for the chair to state at the Annual Meeting or Notice of Meeting that there will be no additional nominations from the floor? 2. Is it proper for the chair to allow a vote only on the "slate" of nominations by Board Development Committee, rather than the individual nominees? (The "slate" consists of one nominee of the Board Development Committee per open position.) If either of these actions is improper, what is the appropriate recourse by the membership at the Annual Meeting? (Note that, if additional nominations from the floor are allowed, there will be more nominees than open positions on the Board of Trustees.)

Hello, In an organization I'm in, the following irregularities occurred while voting on an elected position in a small meeting. 1. A candidate, like others, had left the room while discussion was taking place. When he returned, he was notified of the result of the discussion. The candidate, apparently under the impression that the result was final and that voting did not yet take place, asked why the result was as such, as he was not preferred. Despite the chair of the meeting announcing that voting is to take place, and after a short discussion, he made a short pitch on how he qualifies for that position while people were filling their ballot. 2. While voting was taking place, a member raised an objection that what happened is irregular and gave the candidate an unfair advantage over others. The objection was not taken into account and voting proceeded normally. 3. After the result came out, the candidate who made the pitch won. The member who had raised the objection notified the organization by email that what happened is highly irregular and unfair, after which a few members admitted to have felt pressured inside the meeting into voting for the candidate in question due to his presence and actions. In this case, and in case the organization's bylaws do not specify how you can challenge elections results, what is to be done according to ROR? Is voting repeated or other measures taken, or are members considered responsible for their choices (including the chair who did not take the objection into account)? I personally view the elections to be illegitimate due to the pitch that happened during voting, but I am wary that other members may have not liked the outcome of the election and are using this fact to repeat the voting and change the outcome, and thus setting a bad precedent. Any input is appreciated.

We are electing a new officer (FS), two current officers want to run for the position (EB1 & EB2). Our bylaws state that EB1 and EB2 must resign their current positions to seek FS. This opens two seats. Nominations are in May, election is in June. The FS election will be votes on first. If the nominations for EB1 and EB2 are filled can the loser of FS be nominated and run on election night?

We are electing a new officer (FS), two current officers want to run for the position (EB1 & EB2). Our bylaws state that EB1 and EB2 must resign their current positions to seek FS. This opens two seats. Nominations are in May, election is in June. The FS election will be votes on first. If the nominations for EB1 and EB2 are filled can the loser of FS be nominated and run on election night?

Our bylaws have a restriction of not accepting nominees on election night. On election night one more popular candidate became available. I made a motion that "the bylaw which excludes nominations on election night be suspended". The motion carried almost unanimously. Now a member is questioning the ability to temporary suspend this bylaw item. Did I do wrong? BTW, the candidate in question lost. And last year I attempted to delete that bylaw restriction, but it got lost in procedure.

Part of a global organization, where quorum is sometimes hard to get. There was a special GA and online attendance was used, but the way that they informed members of online attendance and voting was not the most transparent but instead the Executive chose a few members to attend to ensure they reached quorum. The bylaws allow under special cases for electronic attendance. Would it be possible for subsequent GA to call into question quorum and hence the decision made during that GA? If so, what would be needed in terms of votes etc?

Hi. Does anyone have a reference in Robert's Rules of Order concerning the timely filing of an appeal to election results?

Hello, I am on a board that recently had an election. The nominees were accepted, the board voted and by 2/3 vote a new president was elected 22 votes (14/8). The results were clearly not what some in previous power was expecting. A blindside you might say. The next day one of the board members "challenged" the qualifications of the newly elected president. This was not welcomed by the governing board that voted this person in as there was not a challenge before or during the election. And mind you the person challenging was the person that wrote, proposed the eligibility bylaw. also now the past president who ran against this person wants a re vote. He also was at this election and never brought up or challenged his qualifications and he sent out the qualification and eligibility requirements prior to the election, however everyone including these folks accepted the nominees and voted and did a thank you speech after. The board that voted was asked if they re-voted would they change their vote and the answer no and that they wanted to election to hold. The person that was just voted in was previously on the board as well. I will tell you if it were any other person who had the same qualifications as the new president there would not have been a challenge.

Hello all, A community Civic Club with much confusion within currently just held it's election. The current secretary ran for president and won without resigning from his secretary role. Currently, he holds both the secretary and president position. Whats the rule of thumb when it comes to 1.) holding two positions at once and 2.) is the secretary required to step down before running for president so that the secretary role can be filled? Thank you, BrodysDad

Our organization held elections a month ago and it has been discovered that the creditials of candidates (per the bylaws) were never truly certified and subsequently an ineligible person was elected to an office. How do we proceed with handling prior to installation of officers?

We have a situation where someone nominated for an office is trying to drop out of a two person election in order to force the election of the other member. This has enraged other members believing that when the nominations were closed that the person who is intending to drop out to manipulate the election was willing to serve and would easily be elected, thus there were no further nominations and were closed per our By-laws. Also per our by-laws nominations were closed a month ago, with no provision for re-opening. Those who are outraged by the threat of this nominee to drop out of the race, in order to give the election to the other person who many people do not get along with has caused great concern and conflict. The two members involved have publicly told others there is nothing anyone can do about it and if members try to do something about it, the one if not elected will sue the company. Those who are outraged have held a caucus and are planning to write-in another name. If I understand ROR correctly, since our by-laws do not cover this action, once the person accepted the nomination and was present during the nomination process, that person remains on the ballot regardless of what they say about trying to decline. I saw someone in this forum has stated that a person once nominated "can not un-nominate themselves". Therefore, there is a ballot and not an election the member by being unopposed and because there is a ballot election, a write-in is possible. Is that correct? As one of the parliamentarians I have been asked by both sides what is possible and what is not.