Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Improper ballot cast. Do we have to redo nominations?


Guest Loretta

Recommended Posts

We had nominations according to our bylaws and now

we are having elections by secret ballot. A member who is

out of town called in her vote to another member but our bylaws state

that a trustee must be on the phone to validate the vote.

Do we have to hold nominations again or can we just hold a new election?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had nominations according to our bylaws and now

we are having elections by secret ballot. A member who is

out of town called in her vote to another member but our bylaws state

that a trustee must be on the phone to validate the vote.

Do we have to hold nominations again or can we just hold a new election?

There are basically two questions:

  1. Can you tell for sure what her vote was, i.e., for whom she (improperly) voted?
  2. Presuming you do not know how she voted, could her single vote have made a difference in the outcome of the election?

If you have proof of what her improper vote was, and you are certain it is improper (how can you tell without a meeting?) you can simply back it out of the total, so it is not counted. I don't now if that's possible because you give no information on how your phone voting works.

But if you can figure that out or, if her vote was not a deciding vote, there is no need to hold another election. If you cannot identify her vote, and her vote could have made a difference, then maybe you would have to hold another round of voting.

But then I'd ask what the function of the trustee on the phone is supposed to be. Did this member's vote get properly recorded and is she in fact entitled to vote? If so, whose rights were violated?

In any case you would not be required to re-open nominations, but the assembly could open them by a majority vote. If all this is taking place outside a meeting, then you'll have to refer to your own customized rules, because we are clearly way off the page, as far as RONR is concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose we could get ahold of her and ask her what her vote was

And ask the person who submitted the ballot what she wrote down and then

See if a ballot matching exists in the box.

The trustee is responsible for running the election; printing the ballots,

counting and verifying all absentee phone votes. It's just an accountability

thing.

Anything not specifically covered in our bylaws is supposed to be handled

According to Roberts Rules. There are a couple of people in our association

who neglected to come to the nominating meeting or tell anyone of their interest

in being nominated and they are insisting that we need to start over with nominations

Since their has been a problem with the voting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose we could get ahold of her and ask her what her vote was

And ask the person who submitted the ballot what she wrote down and then

See if a ballot matching exists in the box.

The trustee is responsible for running the election; printing the ballots,

counting and verifying all absentee phone votes. It's just an accountability

thing.

Anything not specifically covered in our bylaws is supposed to be handled

According to Roberts Rules. There are a couple of people in our association

who neglected to come to the nominating meeting or tell anyone of their interest

in being nominated and they are insisting that we need to start over with nominations

Since [there] has been a problem with the voting.

I'm still trying to understand how her ballot got in the box if she was not there. Was some member permitted to cast two ballots? If so, you've got other problems! And unless your bylaws provide for absentee voting (which by the haphazard procedure you've described, sounds unlikely) then it is prohibited by RONR, and anyone not present does not get a vote. It is always a bad idea to mix absentee votes with live votes even if the bylaws allow it.

If her vote would not make a difference, then there is no continuing breach, and the election is complete. Did anyone win or lose by just one vote? If not, you're done.

The nomination question was already answered. There is no rule requiring nominations to be redone. If they insist there is a rule, ask to see it.

But be aware: if you do hold another round of voting, it would be in order for someone to move to reopen nominations (majority vote to agree). As there is no rule requiring more nominations, there is no rule prohibiting them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anything not specifically covered in our bylaws is supposed to be handled

According to Roberts Rules. There are a couple of people in our association

who neglected to come to the nominating meeting or tell anyone of their interest

in being nominated and they are insisting that we need to start over with nominations

Since their has been a problem with the voting.

Unless a single vote would make a difference in an election, there's no need to redo anything. If a single vote could make a difference, than you redo the election(s) for only those positions. Nominations don't need to be reopened when you redo elections, but the assembly may do so by majority vote if it wishes.

And unless your bylaws provide for absentee voting (which by the haphazard procedure you've described, sounds unlikely) then it is prohibited by RONR, and anyone not present does not get a vote.

Since the original poster talked about rules regarding trustees verifying votes cast by phone, it actually seems fairly like to me their Bylaws do have absentee voting rules. Haphazard procedure codified in Bylaws is nothing new for this forum.

It is always a bad idea to mix absentee votes with live votes even if the bylaws allow it.

I think it would be better to say that it is a bad idea to authorize the mixing of absentee and live votes in the Bylaws. The way your comment is currently worded could be interpreted as suggesting to ignore the Bylaws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a couple of people in our association who neglected to come to the nominating meeting or tell anyone of their interest in being nominated and they are insisting that we need to start over with nominations Since there has been a problem with the voting.

I think that's referred to as "grasping at straws".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still trying to understand how her ballot got in the box if she was not there. Was some member permitted to cast two ballots? If so, you've got other problems! And unless your bylaws provide for absentee voting (which by the haphazard procedure you've described, sounds unlikely) then it is prohibited by RONR, and anyone not present does not get a vote. It is always a bad idea to mix absentee votes with live votes even if the bylaws allow it.

If her vote would not make a difference, then there is no continuing breach, and the election is complete. Did anyone win or lose by just one vote? If not, you're done.

The nomination question was already answered. There is no rule requiring nominations to be redone. If they insist there is a rule, ask to see it.

But be aware: if you do hold another round of voting, it would be in order for someone to move to reopen nominations (majority vote to agree). As there is no rule requiring more nominations, there is no rule prohibiting them.

Our system of absentee voting is a trustee, with another member present gets

The person on the phone and asks their vote. In this case, the member called another

member and told her how to fill in her ballot. That member then cast her personal vote,

and the absentee members vote. We are rarely all at our meetings together because

someone is usually out on the job so there is a ballot for each member and a sign-in sheet

and people are on their honor to cast their ballot and sign off.

The votes have not yet been counted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is always a bad idea to mix absentee votes with live votes even if the bylaws allow it.

I think it would be better to say that it is a bad idea to authorize the mixing of absentee and live votes in the Bylaws. The way your comment is currently worded could be interpreted as suggesting to ignore the Bylaws.

Yes, that is clearer wording.

I didn't mean to suggest that the bylaws should ever be ignored. But I did mean to suggest that just because an idea is embodied in the bylaws doesn't mean it wasn't (or still isn't) a bad idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This exact procedure is spelled out in the by-laws.

Then wait until you have the results, and then redo only any election(s) in which a single vote could have made a difference. It is not required to reopen nominations for any redone elections, but the assembly may choose to do so by majority vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...