justcelia Posted March 24, 2011 at 01:16 AM Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 at 01:16 AM Our by-laws state that candidates for officer running unopposed must be elected by a simple majority of votes (50% +1). We had 42 voters. The candidate only received 17 votes. The candidate states she spoke to a "lawyer for Robert's Rules" and was told that because our ballot (approved at the previous Membership Meeting and the same as we always use) is not a Yes/No ballot and that she should be instated. Our ballot has an area beside each name that you check if that person is the candidate you believe is right for the position. We do not have a "No" box. All of the other positions were filled with a majority of votes (30+).What is the correct interpretation for the unopposed nominee who received 17 votes out of 42 voters? Were we wrong in not having a "No" box? And if so, what does this mean for the current board who were elected in this same way?Thank you for your help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted March 24, 2011 at 01:53 AM Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 at 01:53 AM Our by-laws state that candidates for officer running unopposed must be elected by a simple majority of votes (50% +1).Majority = more than half... not fifty percent plus one. We had 42 voters. The candidate only received 17 votes.In determining the results, you count votes, not voters. For each office, you should list the total number of votes cast for that office, followed by the number required to elect (i.e. more than half of the votes cast), followed by the total votes received by each candidate. See RONR(10th ed.), p. 403.If no one else received a vote for that office, there were only 17 votes, of which she received 17. That's a winner. The candidate states she spoke to a "lawyer for Robert's Rules" and was told that because our ballot (approved at the previous Membership Meeting and the same as we always use) is not a Yes/No ballot and that she should be instated.Elections should not be Yes/No. The only way to vote against a candidate is to vote for another. See RONR(10th ed.), p. 399, l. 34 - p. 400, l.4. Our ballot has an area beside each name that you check if that person is the candidate you believe is right for the position. We do not have a "No" box.Good, you shouldn't have a "No" box. All of the other positions were filled with a majority of votes (30+).Each office is a separate election, unless you are electing multiple persons to the same office, such as eight directors.What is the correct interpretation for the unopposed nominee who received 17 votes out of 42 voters? Were we wrong in not having a "No" box? And if so, what does this mean for the current board who were elected in this same way?Thank you for your help.Don't count out of voters, count out of votes. She received 17 votes out of how many votes for that office? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted March 24, 2011 at 02:12 AM Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 at 02:12 AM Is it me???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justcelia Posted March 24, 2011 at 02:13 AM Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 at 02:13 AM So if someone runs unopposed, they automaticly get in? We had the same situation before and the person did not get the post. We had the same by-laws then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted March 24, 2011 at 02:18 AM Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 at 02:18 AM Our by-laws state that candidates for officer running unopposed must be elected by a simple majority of votes (50% +1). We had 42 voters. The candidate only received 17 votes. The candidate states she spoke to a "lawyer for Robert's Rules" and was told that because our ballot (approved at the previous Membership Meeting and the same as we always use) is not a Yes/No ballot and that she should be instated. Our ballot has an area beside each name that you check if that person is the candidate you believe is right for the position. We do not have a "No" box. All of the other positions were filled with a majority of votes (30+).What is the correct interpretation for the unopposed nominee who received 17 votes out of 42 voters? Were we wrong in not having a "No" box? And if so, what does this mean for the current board who were elected in this same way?Thank you for your help.Why are you asking the same question again?The answers won't change. And you don't seem to have bothered to read the answers anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted March 24, 2011 at 02:24 AM Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 at 02:24 AM So if someone runs unopposed, they automaticly get in? We had the same situation before and the person did not get the post. We had the same by-laws then.There's nothing wrong with your bylaws, you just were working under a misconception of how to count a "majority vote" with respect to elections. The fact that you counted incorrectly in the past is not a good argument for always doing so.If someone runs unopposed, and you have a ballot vote, people can always write in other names, so the election is not automatic. But without a doubt it is easier to get elected if nobody runs against you. I don't think anyone would argue with that. The point is that blank ballots or abstentions should never be counted as votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justcelia Posted March 24, 2011 at 02:28 AM Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 at 02:28 AM Thank you all very much. I really appreciate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.