robert jarman

Technically I could ask the national association on this, but it is a very decentralized system. I am going to see what I can do by convincing the new president and secretary in the meantime that this change is a good idea. The convention can govern itself but the chapters of the convention in regional zones where I live are also bound by RONR and they too don´t release these results based on the bylaws of the association. The secretary of the association in general has the right to documentation from these chapters and would have the authority to release them.

It´s a political party, so the finances do need reporting to the public. A different law regulates regular non profit associations, but parties are included too. Members of such a society have the right by law to the bylaws. I keep trying to explain. There are no bylaws or constitutions or rules of procedure the party has adopted that state they supercede the RONR in relation to these tellers reports. The RONR are the only rules of order that apply to this and the section I quoted is supposed to stand. The RONR says under no circumstances is it permissible to not release it. Not by a majority, not by two thirds, not even by unanimous consent does it say this can be averted. A motion to suspend the rules in any case cannot pass by a smaller margin than those protected by it, IE a rule protecting a minority of one third or more cannot be suspended but by at least a two thirds vote, and rules related to absentees also cannot be suspended either. Rules that have their application outside of the parliamentary meeting also cannot be suspended, as per 25:13. Vote tallies are meant to be a record for all members for the future, so that would be applicable after the meeting. Absentees who have a right to the minutes can´t give consent to suspending this kind of rule meant to protect them. The section I quoted says that the teller report is in the minutes, and in our society this means that they will be reported to a standing committee to govern in between conventions and will be reported at the next convention to, and they are even published to the internet. I cannot possibly see how suspending the rules to prevent the publishing of the vote tallies could be permissible.

Members have the right to accurate records of the organization. This is part of statutory law where I live. As well, knowing this sort of stuff is a strong way to improve transparency, especially given that doing this sort of thing so often often creates rot in associations over time and makes people too scared to say when they think something is wrong. People are afraid to run for election or propose motions if they don´t even know if they were remotely close. It is also a direct violation of the rules of order, which we as members are expecting to be adhered to if our bylaws say they should be adhered to. And what if the results were close, to the point where a recount might be a good idea. A convention should be able to order a recount. Fostering a culture of transparency is also extremely important, given that the association also frequently comments on political issues of the day and despises actions it sees as corrupt with the current government, who often don´t release vital numbers and tries to shush things within their own departments. Fostering it also encourages members to participate if they can see at a mere glance that all of our numbers check out. It makes us trustworthy and makes people feel comfortable with us if people are ever to believe our criticism of the government. This isn´t a repressive state, this is supposed to be democracy where we trust in our institutions and trust officials even when we disagree with them, how can you have that kind of trust, unwavering trust that survives gut feelings of doubt, if we don´t even provide transparency 101 with ourselves to those who pay our fees.

They never proposed to adopt a rule to prohibit the release of the votes. All that was proposed was a basic motion to not release the report this particular time. The constitution of the association says they follow RONR to the extent that it doesn´t conflict with the constitution, and the constitution says nothing about releasing or not releasing the report. As far as I know, the candidates did get majority support, but this is 100% on faith of the tellers, the chair, and the scrutineers. The convention didn´t get the chance to look at the numbers.

At a convention held recently, there was an election for several contested positions. A couple vice presidents too but the most contentious one was for president. While everyone was getting prepared to vote, someone asked whether the numbers for each candidate would be released, and the chair said no. I immediately objected as that is a violation of RONR 45:40 where it says in no uncertain terms that under no circumstances may the teller´s report be released. I don´t see that wording as allowing a suspension of the rules. The constitution of the association says nothing about this procedure, only that a majority is required for an election (although fails to explain how to achieve that if nobody does get it on any particular ballot). The chair consulted with the parliamentarian, and the two of them concluded that if a motion was passed to destroy the ballot, then they would not release them. They also concluded that it would be a suspension of the rules requiring 2/3 to pass, but they also failed to say to everyone else that it was a suspend the rules motion needing 2/3. I happened to be sitting next to the parliamentarian so I heard what they were saying. That motion was moved and seconded, and was passed by 322 votes in favour to 95 against, out of roughly 1200 people at the convention who could vote, however they didn´t release the results of that motion to everyone else either. In fact, on no instance did they release the numbers for and against on any motion in the whole convention even when a tally count was necessary several times and we are entirely dependent on the chair´s judgement on this. I also imagine this kind of suspension could also impact the rights of absentees too who might be interested in the numbers like this, especially given that the rule I referenced dictates how the numbers are to be entered into the minutes too which is often done for the benefit of those absent. I don´t know what next. Would this ordinarily be able to give rise to some kind of further appeals in most association to the committee relevant to it? I couldn´t get justice at the convention hall itself for transparency of the numbers.