write in ballots

[ghymm64]

I belong to a small non-profit organization.  Problem we are seeing each year is a vote for the officers to run the organization and upon balloting day, someone comes out of the woodwork with a carefully planned, unbeknownst to the board of directors, attempt to gain access to the treasurer's position.  These people amass a lot of members who don't normally show for meetings, but show up the day of the election and write in a candidate that no one knows much about.  We consider this very dangerous.  To merely allow actions like this is problematic.  We have considered eliminating write in votes under the auspices that nominations are made at a general meeting of the membership and if you desire to run for a board office position you should declare it at that time.  To try and gain access by stealth and skullduggery seems unfair, and unruly.  We believe if you really want to be on the board you should step forward and be nominated, or have someone nominate you or hand in your letter specifying your intentions to run for a position.  We have also tried to alleviate this by designing qualifications for board members.  In other words, you have to be qualified to run.  While this seems prohibitive, it may prevent someone who just joined, that no one really knows anything about, and who also knows nothing of accounting from seizing the treasury position.  We read all too often of thefts, missing funds, and properties allocated without boards even knowing the thefts are occurring before it is too late.  How can we go about removing the write in votes?  Some members claim you can't because it is un-American, or against Roberts rules of order.  Some believe if we write it into the by laws it can be accomplished.  Help, answers?

[jstackpo]

Forbidding write-in votes will require a bylaw amendment. 

[George Mervosh]

Agreeing with Dr. Stackpole, I disagree with nearly everything posted as a reason for wanting to do so.

[ghymm64]

9 minutes ago, jstackpo said:

Forbidding write-in votes will require a bylaw amendment. 

 

10 minutes ago, George Mervosh said:

Agreeing with Dr. Stackpole, I disagree with nearly everything posted as a reason for wanting to do so.

Then perhaps the question would be how to prevent these attempts to gain a board position?  Our organization is small, and on average, we have 15-18 people vote in the annual election.  So a very small number of members can overrun the board if they so desire.  That promotes chaos.  We believe if persons want to be actively involved that they should step forward and be nominated. There is a considerable amount of money to safeguard too.

[J. J.]

2 minutes ago, ghymm64 said:

 

Then perhaps the question would be how to prevent these attempts to gain a board position?  Our organization is small, and on average, we have 15-18 people vote in the annual election.  So a very small number of members can overrun the board if they so desire.  That promotes chaos.  We believe if persons want to be actively involved that they should step forward and be nominated. There is a considerable amount of money to safeguard too.

First, I agree with both of my colleagues, but especially Mr. Mervosh. 

The remedy is either a bylaw provision eliminating write-in votes (which might not be a good idea) or making sure that the supporters of you candidate show up and vote.  The wisdom of how the members vote may be questioned, but their right to vote, under the rules, cannot be.

[Guest Who's Coming to Dinner]

11 minutes ago, ghymm64 said:

So a very small number of members can overrun the board if they so desire.

Perhaps you have forgotten that the board works for the membership, not the other way 'round.

[Richard Brown]

34 minutes ago, ghymm64 said:

. . .   So a very small number of members can overrun the board if they so desire.  

 

22 minutes ago, Guest Who's Coming to Dinner said:

Perhaps you have forgotten that the board works for the membership, not the other way 'round.

I agree. If it is desired that the board have exclusive control of the affairs of the organization, the bylaws may be amended to give me board exclusive control. But I would certainly think long and hard before adopting such a provision. It is quite likely to be regretted over time when the board starts ignoring the wishes of the membership.

[ghymm64]

Replying to "guest who's coming to dinner":  We haven't forgotten that the board works for the membership.  Our concerns, as per board member duties of the Treasurer, are to protect the monies earned, pay bills timely, and provide reports on the status of funds, accounts, and investments.  Protect as in prevent theft.  While currently members can write in other's names, how do we appear down the road when monies are missing but we can say "we followed the rules"?  We are not against people being voted in.  What we are trying to prevent is stealth elections with ulterior motives, something a majority of the members may not be aware of since they don't show up to vote.  Quite frankly, I find it insulting that we have a nominations period of over a month to nominate candidates and once the nomination process is closed that someone chooses to try an "end around" the process with write in votes the day of the election.  Many of the members don't show up to vote because the candidates for the board positions are unopposed.  I believe the first responder is correct with a by law provision. No one ever questions a right to vote. 

[Richard Brown]

If you are concerned about misappropriation of funds, you can and should require that the treasurer be bonded.

Edited to add: unless it is very carefully drafted, a prohibition against write-in votes would be in the nature of a rule of order and could be suspended by a two-thirds vote, even if It's in the bylaws .

Edited December 20, 2017 at 06:08 PM by Richard Brown
Added last paragraph

[Gary Novosielski]

55 minutes ago, ghymm64 said:

 

Then perhaps the question would be how to prevent these attempts to gain a board position?  Our organization is small, and on average, we have 15-18 people vote in the annual election.  So a very small number of members can overrun the board if they so desire.  That promotes chaos.  We believe if persons want to be actively involved that they should step forward and be nominated. There is a considerable amount of money to safeguard too.

The problem with democracy is that you don't always get what you want.  According to the rules in RONR, write-in votes must be allowed, any members can vote, even if they just joined, and there are no requirements to "step forward" and be nominated.

Changing any of these rules would require a bylaws amendment.  If I were a member, I'd vote against it.

[ghymm64]

Thanks to all.  I will take these discussions back to our organization's board for their consideration.  Appreciate all the comments and insight.

[jstackpo]

Right, and it known as politics, in a democracy.    As usual, YSYL.

[AFS1970]

Just curious reading this thread, has this situation happened with different candidates in different years or is this one person who keeps running this type of campaign?