Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Board elections


Guest Rodney Guggenheim

Recommended Posts

Guest Rodney Guggenheim

OK have question about elections. Our Group says they do the Robert rules of Order, so my question is there are 5 people who were put up to vote for board position (3 vacancies) the winner 1 is in good standing and meets the requirements for running  person 2 just joined not meeting requirements 6 months a member is good standing and at least 18 year old to vote! person 3 was joined by parents as family  but there dues went in rears  for a few years he then joined not meeting the requirements to be elected. So member 4 is a member, member 5  is meeting the requirements. So if person 2 and 3 didn't meet the requirement would member 4 then be the winner for the position he/she were running for??? now Part 2  some of the board now know what they did so they don't want person 4  one board, they want to wait till they person 2 and 3 meet requirements and then be appointed to the board. this has been said to some none  board members! 

 So some want to hold off on appointing those two person 2 and 3 is this legal? It seems that they only use what fits them (some ) at the time. I would like advice on this with section and articles and paragraghs

thanks Rod

mmtb844@hughes.net  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK have question about elections. Our Group says they do the Robert rules of Order, so my question is there are 5 people who were put up to vote for board position (3 vacancies) the winner 1 is in good standing and meets the requirements for running  person 2 just joined not meeting requirements 6 months a member is good standing and at least 18 year old to vote! person 3 was joined by parents as family  but there dues went in rears  for a few years he then joined not meeting the requirements to be elected. So member 4 is a member, member 5  is meeting the requirements. So if person 2 and 3 didn't meet the requirement would member 4 then be the winner for the position he/she were running for??? now Part 2  some of the board now know what they did so they don't want person 4  one board, they want to wait till they person 2 and 3 meet requirements and then be appointed to the board. this has been said to some none  board members! 

 So some want to hold off on appointing those two person 2 and 3 is this legal? It seems that they only use what fits them (some ) at the time. I would like advice on this with section and articles and paragraghs

Members 4 and 5 are elected if they received a majority of the votes cast, or if the society's bylaws provide for election by plurality. Otherwise, the election is incomplete and another round of voting must be held. See RONR, 11th ed., pg. 441 for information on electing multiple directors.

If Members 4 and 5 have been elected, then it is certainly improper to stall until Members 2 and 3 are eligible. Even if Members 4 and 5 have not been elected, I would not advise that the membership wait that long to complete the election. Even if they do, Members 2 and 3 would need to be elected again at that time. Because they were ineligible at the time they were elected, their election remains invalid even if they later become eligible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hieu and Josh

thank you for getting back to me

OK the voting went like this member #1 received 16 votes, members 2 and 3 received 15 votes each BUT these two were not by our bylaws able to be voted into office as the bylaws say( 6 months in good standing prior to annual meeting and age of 18)  Art. 5 section 4. Member #4 and #5 are in good standing. Some of the board member said they are going to wait till  members 2 and 3 become eligible to be appointed to the position. So with 2 and 3

ineligible at the annual meeting would member 4 and 5 be placed into the  as they were vote getters 12 and 10 for them. and what some of the board want is to wait to put them in office place.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hieu and Josh

thank you for getting back to me

OK the voting went like this member #1 received 16 votes, members 2 and 3 received 15 votes each BUT these two were not by our bylaws able to be voted into office as the bylaws say( 6 months in good standing prior to annual meeting and age of 18) Art. 5 section 4. Member #4 and #5 are in good standing. Some of the board member said they are going to wait till members 2 and 3 become eligible to be appointed to the position. So with 2 and 3

ineligible at the annual meeting would member 4 and 5 be placed into the as they were vote getters 12 and 10 for them. and what some of the board want is to wait to put them in office place.

How many ballots were cast in total?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

person  did the counting and beleive there were about 22-25 people there (was her first time doing it and after all was done the news pres.said trash them , but later from business manger said we keep them ) there was a coo to get one person off the board so they the pres and the new vice pres. loaded the annul meeting with friends from AZ. many locals were out of town this time as some had surgery and others had family reunion and in a small town word travels fast and stories you hear

Link to comment
Share on other sites

person  did the counting and beleive there were about 22-25 people there (was her first time doing it and after all was done the news pres.said trash them , but later from business manger said we keep them ) there was a coo to get one person off the board so they the pres and the new vice pres. loaded the annul meeting with friends from AZ. many locals were out of town this time as some had surgery and others had family reunion and in a small town word travels fast and stories you hear

 

If a majority vote is required to elect and you don't know how many ballots were cast, you have no way of knowing who won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

person did the counting and beleive there were about 22-25 people there (was her first time doing it and after all was done the news pres.said trash them , but later from business manger said we keep them)

Unless your bylaws provide that a plurality vote is sufficient (in which event Members 4 and 5 are certainly elected), you need to figure out how many ballots were cast in total, in order to determine if they received a majority of the ballots cast. This should have been part of the tellers' report (something to correct in the future).

You say that Member 4 received 12 votes and Member 5 received 10 votes. Based on this information, we have three possible outcomes for these candidates, depending on how many ballots were cast in total (and whether your bylaws provide that a plurality elects).

If 24 or more votes were cast, then neither candidate received a majority vote, and neither candidate is elected. Another round of voting will need to be held for both positions.

If 20-23 votes were cast, then Member 4 received a majority vote, but Member 5 did not. Member 4 is elected, but another round of voting will need to be held for the other position.

If fewer than 20 votes were cast, then both candidates received a majority vote. Members 4 and 5 are elected. This is also the outcome if your bylaws provide that a plurality elects (regardless of the number of ballots cast).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK at the beginning of annual meeting there were 25 present had reports etc. then one member had floor and people started to leave, by time he was finished 5 member had left. Leaving 20 members.  So by the time voting got start only 20 were there, so then it would mean members 4 and 5 would be elected to the board!  also talk is the pres. and vice pres. would wait till the two ineligible members become eligible for office! is this legal? art.# section#   please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK at the beginning of annual meeting there were 25 present had reports etc. then one member had floor and people started to leave, by time he was finished 5 member had left. Leaving 20 members.  So by the time voting got start only 20 were there, so then it would mean members 4 and 5 would be elected to the board! 

 

Well, no, not necessarily. Take another look at the ranges I gave. If 20 members were present, and every member cast a ballot, that means that only Member 4 was elected. 10 votes is not a majority (more than half) of 20. Another election would need to be held for the remaining position, the sooner the better. Of course, it's not necessarily the case that every member cast a ballot. So I repeat again - you need to find out how many ballots were actually cast.

 

also talk is the pres. and vice pres. would wait till the two ineligible members become eligible for office! is this legal? art.# section#   please.

 

I don't think there's anything which directly addresses this absurd idea, but a good catch-all defense whenever the President claims he can do something silly is found in RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 456-457. The rules discussing voting for multiple candidates and incomplete elections may also be helpful, and these are found on pgs. 441 and 444. Maybe a dictionary definition of "ineligible" would help. Additionally, in the event that the President and Vice President do not listen to reason, see Sections 23 and 24 on Point of Order and Appeal, and hope the assembly is more sensible than its leaders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to the libaray and read up on those pages pgs 441-4444 and 456-457 going to look at sect. 23,24 ,point of order

thanks all for help

think now stuff is going to hit fan

RG

I used a version of this situation for an educational seminar today, and the group that got it pointed out another problem to me - the math doesn't add up.

You said earlier that Member A received 16 votes, Members B and C received 15 votes each, Member D received 12 votes, and Member E received 10 votes. This adds up to 68 votes. In your latest estimate, you said that 20 members were present at the time of the vote. Even if all 20 members cast ballots, this should result in no more than 60 votes, since each member would vote for up to three candidates (because there are three open positions). So you're going to need to do some more research to sort this all out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the deal on that is there were 3 seats so we all had to vote for 3 of the 5 is there a way to call and talk with you if its ok check earlier post for email

As Edgar notes, this is yet another problem. In any event, however, the math doesn't add up even if all members cast three votes. There are still more votes than there should be, if there were indeed 20 members present at the time of the vote. There would need to be at least 23 ballots cast for the vote totals you provided to make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

going to get the sign in sheet to see how many were there in the beginning and as one person went on points of order people got up to leave. I'll call you Josh tomorrow and we can talk in lengh  

Rod

PS I found copy of 11th ed

I'll remind you again that the number you really, really need is how many ballots were actually cast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

going to get the sign in sheet to see how many were there in the beginning and as one person went on points of order people got up to leave. I'll call you Josh tomorrow and we can talk in lengh  

Rod

PS I found copy of 11th ed

It's important to note (and so bears repeating) that it makes no difference how many people signed in, or how many came and went. The only number that's important is the number of ballots that were actually cast by eligible voters.

At this point, if the ballots have been secured since the election, it may be possible for you to order a recount of the ballots. If their physical security is in any doubt, you're basically forced into holding a new election, because you have no way of determining the results.

The number you need to determine is how many of the ballots cast contained at least one vote for someone for one of the three seats. (and no more than three votes). Whether they voted for one, two, or three, that's still counted as one ballot cast, and the total number of ballots cast is what you need a majority of in order to be elected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that is a good point BUT they said throw them out but there were the now vice who was pres should have know to keep the ballotstheones who would have said keep them for referance were out of town but the past board member should have said something but didnt there was a plan at this meeting will  talk more to Josh tonight

Rod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's important to note (and so bears repeating) that it makes no difference how many people signed in, or how many came and went. The only number that's important is the number of ballots that were actually cast by eligible voters.At this point, if the ballots have been secured since the election, it may be possible for you to order a recount of the ballots. If their physical security is in any doubt, you're basically forced into holding a new election, because you have no way of determining the results.The number you need to determine is how many of the ballots cast contained at least one vote for someone for one of the three seats. (and no more than three votes). Whether they voted for one, two, or three, that's still counted as one ballot cast, and the total number of ballots cast is what you need a majority of in order to be elected.

I don't see any need to redo the entire election. Member A was declared elected by the chair, no timely Point of Order was raised, and there is no question that Member A is eligible. The fact that the assembly keeps atrocious records doesn't suddenly make this election invalid.

If it cannot be determined how many ballots were cast, however, then I agree that it would not seem appropriate to declare Members D or E elected at this time, and it would be necessary to hold another round of voting for both positions.

that is a good point BUT they said throw them out but there were the now vice who was pres should have know to keep the ballotstheones who would have said keep them for referance were out of town but the past board member should have said something but didnt there was a plan at this meeting

For future reference, the number of ballots cast should be included in the tellers' report, which should be included in the minutes. Therefore, even if the ballots are thrown out prematurely, it should be known how many ballots were cast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure Josh can get this all straightened out when our guest speaks with him over the telephone at length this evening, as threatened in post #16.

Well, I did my best. I learned that the bylaws provide for election by plurality, so most of the conversation in this thread is now moot. The new problem is that the general membership only meets annually, so it will be necessary to call a special meeting of the membership in order to declare the election of Members B and C ineligible and declare Members D and E elected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I did my best. I learned that the bylaws provide for election by plurality, so most of the conversation in this thread is now moot. The new problem is that the general membership only meets annually, so it will be necessary to call a special meeting of the membership in order to declare the election of Members B and C ineligible and declare Members D and E elected.

 

Are you sure that Members D and E should be declared elected in a plurality-vote election? If I understand the situation correctly, I'm not sure it can be said that they have fulfilled the criterion (RONR, p. 404) of having received "the largest number of votes to be given any candidate or proposition," or whatever the equivalent of that requirement is when more than one position is being filled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you sure that Members D and E should be declared elected in a plurality-vote election? If I understand the situation correctly, I'm not sure it can be said that they have fulfilled the criterion (RONR, p. 404) of having received "the largest number of votes to be given any candidate or proposition," or whatever the equivalent of that requirement is when more than one position is being filled.

 

After re-reading (well, skimming) the previous discussion on this subject, I don't know if I'm sure of anything. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...