Guest Ms. Walker

Election Abnormality

6 posts in this topic

We recently had a general body election of officers for our Executive Board. The office of VP is being contested on the grounds that ballots were distributed, some people voted and turned in their ballots to a Teller - unfortunately, nominations from floor were still in progress.  When there were actual nominations from the floor for alternative candidates, some members asked for their ballot to be returned so they could re-examine their choices. The chair of the Nominating Committee and President of the organization were unaware of the activity in the rear of the room (no excuse).  The President had not said 'nominations from the floor are now closed' (which signifies closing of the poll??) for the last position before the Teller started collecting ballots (untrained Teller).  Are there grounds for a member to challenge the validity of the election?  If so, what is her recourse? She would like for the original ballot (without the write-in's) to stand and be voted on again.  Is this a case of a Teller acting preemptively or an election that needs to be overturned?  Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you want to invalidate the election of the VP, but not the other officers who were on the same ballot?

Personally I think the election should stand as is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to invalidate the election at all - the aggrieved mother want to invalidate the office she was running for which is VP.  On what grounds do you think the election should stand as is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Guest Ms. Walker said:

I don't want to invalidate the election at all - the aggrieved mother want to invalidate the office she was running for which is VP.  On what grounds do you think the election should stand as is?

I didn't mean you personally, sorry. :)   From what I can tell based on your facts, nothing on p. 444-446 in RONR (11th ed.) applies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No worries - after all this, can't take anything personally!  Thanks for the page reference; that's the area I was looking as well as pages 414-415.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Guest Ms. Walker said:

No worries - after all this, can't take anything personally!  Thanks for the page reference; that's the area I was looking as well as pages 414-415.

Since you (yes, you) seem to have a command of the facts, read the earlier cited pages to help determine if there was indeed a violation of the rules where a point of order can be raised later.  Right now I just don't see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Loading...