damian110

lol sorry about that, I will use RONR! Is there a good searchable version of the 12th edition? My only challenge now is what do I do. Do I provide the section which seems very clear to the Association, the management company and challenge their correction based on that section? It seems like that would be the next logical step.

to Gary-Is the quote you provided in the 12th edition of RRON 46:50?

I have reviewed the contract. There is nothing in the contract that permits them to modify or change the election results they are required to operate all meetings and elections of associations under RONR according to state statue. They are only to provide the manpower, ballots, minutes, storage of ballots, counts, etc. They would still have to operate the election and meetings under RONR as I understand it. When I reviewed the records for the election it was as happened in the meeting not the revised count.

Gary and anyone else, Looking for clarification. When the original results were announced for the four candidates of which there were four positions the terms were determined by the order in which the candidate had the highest votes. There were three 3 year terms and one 2 year term. In the meeting at the second reading of the votes and currently the official document on record shows one order, the first one read. The day after the meeting was adjourned the managing company sent out an email which stated "Due to an error made by our staff during tallying of the votes cast for the Election of Directors at the Annual Meeting, a total of xxxx votes cast for Candidate 4 were mistakenly posted for Candidate 1. Upon correction of this error, the accurate election results should have been as follows: " and the new results were posted with the corresponding terms. This change caused the number one candidate in the first reading to be moved to the fourth position (it was a very close election). The managing agent went on to say "The only change in the above election results different from those announced at the Annual Meeting is that candidate 4 vote total qualified her to election to a 3-year term (instead of the 2-year term announced at the Meeting) and candidate vote total qualified him to election to a 2-year term (instead of the 3-year term announced at the Meeting), as there is no change to the candidates who were elected to the Board, or the 3- year terms for Candidate 2 and Candidate 3. It seems they are basing the ability to change the terms in the election on the fact that the candidates were all elected but due to a count error they are able to correct the count, which in turn impacted the terms. Is this a technicality that would allow the change because the candidates elected did not change only their terms? sorry for the additional questions. It always seems the devil is in the details.

Josh, thank you. As far as I know and after reviewing all our By-Laws, State statues and every other governing document I can get my hands on there is no authority of the Board or the managing agent to do anything on their own. While you are correct in that it may be counter productive, we are dealing with a board that continually makes things up as they go. I am not new to boards and have served on many in all positions. This association is particularly difficult.

Josh and Atul, thank you very much for your guidance. Atul you are correct it is an AOAO. I have contacted the governmental agency responsible and the applicable rules governing condominiums do not address this issue and they referred me back to Roberts Rules, nor do our By-Laws or Declarations. You are also correct in that what happens is that legal advice is often necessary...all on an individuals cost, whereas the Board has the power of its attorney paid for by the members. it becomes costly to contest such situations and that is why many folks just do not bother. I greatly appreciate the time and effort of your detailed responses. I know these can be time consuming.

Thank you all for the information. I was able to review 46.48 -46.50. To answer the question of what has prompted my inquiry to this forum. The meeting was adjourned without any challenges or call for a recount. The day after the meeting the officers of the boards were announced, and the new/re-elected directors were announced but no official numbers-other than a note on the bottom stating Final voting percentages will be released upon receipt from the managing agent-even though the numbers had been announced at the annual meeting. Two days later the managing agent sent an email to all members stating "Due to an error made by our staff during tallying of the votes cast for the Election of Directors at the Annual Meeting, a total of fifty-six (56) votes cast for xxxxxxxxxxx were mistakenly posted for xxxxxxxxx. Upon correction of this error, the accurate election results should have been as follows:" With the recalculated results posted. The change resulted in a change in terms for the individual directors. After reviewing the sections referenced above 46.48-46.50 and interpreting how they would apply I came to the following layman's interpretation: 1. According to the RR "the voting body itself is the ultimate judge of election disputes, only that body has the authority to resolve them in the absence of a bylaw or special rule of order that specifically grans another body that authority" There is nothing in the Bylaws or special rules, and would it be correct to say that the managing agent did not have the authority to make changes to the results that were read at the meeting? 2. The vote was by ballot at an association meeting and the "body" who voted was the entire membership. 3. Had an objection been raised prior to adjournment and after the certification for a recount, it could have been easily done. 3. Once adjourned, a recount requires a vote within the next quarter (90 days) by the same body that voted, ie, the full membership. 4. The Association can hold a special association meeting to vote on whether to have a recount performed. If passed, the recount would be held. If not passed, the recount would not be held. If no meeting is called, no recount is held, the vote would stand. thank you again for your time and answers. Not being familiar with all of RR puts folks such as myself at a substantial disadvantage. I have found that often those in control prefer ignorance of the rules.

I am a member of an Association which operates under Roberts Rules recently revised. The Association recently held an election for new directors at its last annual meeting, held for the purposes of election through the Ballot process. All candidate directors were eligible for election. Ballots were collected, counted and the results announced. There were four nominees and four open positions. The length of term was determined by the number of ballots for each nominee. The Ballots were counted by a management agent, witnessed by two members of the association who were not candidates. A parliamentarian who was appointed the pro tem and in charge of the meeting then read the results a second time and then signed off on the certificate of election and the meeting was adjourned. I was informed that the state has no provisions in its statues governing the issue of election certification, the By-Laws do not cover certification of elections and only state "Each Owner shall be entitled to cumulate the Owner's votes and give all thereof to one nominee or to distribute the votes in such manner as the Owner shall determine among any or all of the nominees, and the nominees receiving the highest number of votes on the foregoing basis, up to ·the total number of Directors to be elected, shall be deemed elected." The certificate is currently in the official record of the association election and is provided upon request by members. Under Roberts Rules 1. What is the process to challenge the results of the meeting after it is adjourned? 2. On what grounds can the results be challenged after a vote has been held, results read twice, election certified and meeting adjourned? 3. Can the results be challenged after the meeting is adjourned? 3. If an error was made on the counting of ballots and is discovered after the meeting is adjourned, can the results be changed (if so by whom) or is there a process that could be implemented to correct the error? Sorry for all the information I hope is helpful rather than hinders any guidance or advice that can be provided. thank you for any guidance.