Guest Jack Rivers Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:25 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:25 AM If an organization has voting by ballot with polls open for specific hours prior to a monthly scheduled meeting and there are tie votes, the president does not wish to break a tie can they call for a secret ballot at the meeting without notification to the members and specifically those that voted and are not present at the meeting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:38 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:38 AM That's a sticky one...Normally you can "complete" a tied (or otherwise incomplete) election right away, or even at the "next meeting" without a notice to the membership - p. 444. But that assumes the election took place AT or during the meeting, the only proper way to do so - p. 423.From what you say, the implication is that people voted before the actual meeting and then went home. This is in violation of p. 423, but if your rules allow this version of absentee voting, OK. But your rules should (clearly they don't) say what to do if there are ties, &c.Since your rules are (I presume) are silent about incomplete elections, the safest ("safe" = "no law suits") thing to do is re-notify everybody and do it all over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:39 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:39 AM And... did the president vote "first time around"? If so he doesn't get to vote a second time even to break a tie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert B Fish Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:40 AM Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 at 02:40 AM If you vote by ballot, the president votes along with the other members. If you have a tie vote, you have an incomplete election and must must revote. -Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chris Umbaugh Posted January 5, 2012 at 02:50 PM Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 at 02:50 PM The polls are open 1:00 P.M. to 3:00 P.M. and than 5:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M than a regular scheduled meeting is held where votes are counted and there is a tie you would have to readvertise to the membership for a revote on the tied positions. Most times in bylaws there will be something said about a reballot until the tie is broken, however that does not mean you do it immediately. You need to allow those that originally voted a chance to revote and that shoudl be set by the exact times set in your bylwas for voting. Everyone agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Britton Posted January 5, 2012 at 03:18 PM Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 at 03:18 PM You need to allow those that originally voted a chance to revote and that shoudl be set by the exact times set in your bylwas for voting. Everyone agree.If the bylaws are silent, you would proceed as Mr. Fish has suggested. (RONR/11: pg 441, line 2 - 5.) However, if the assembly wishes to adjourn before the election is complete, they could provide for an adjourned meeting as specified in Robert's page 444 (line 9 - 15), and complete the election at the adjourned meeting.in this situation what the assembly should do is determind by the assembly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 6, 2012 at 04:41 AM Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 at 04:41 AM The polls are open 1:00 P.M. to 3:00 P.M. and than 5:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M than a regular scheduled meeting is held where votes are counted and there is a tie you would have to readvertise to the membership for a revote on the tied positions. Most times in bylaws there will be something said about a reballot until the tie is broken, however that does not mean you do it immediately. You need to allow those that originally voted a chance to revote and that shoudl be set by the exact times set in your bylwas for voting. Everyone agree.In the unusual (and unwise) event that a society has prescribed specific times for voting outside of meetings in its Bylaws and has neglected to make provisions for additional rounds of balloting, it will be up to the organization to interpret its Bylaws. See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 588-591. Since the exact rules will vary from association to association, it's impossible to provide a general answer, and the intepretation of any particular case is beyond the scope of RONR and this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted January 6, 2012 at 05:24 PM Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 at 05:24 PM If you meet at least quarterly, I would suggest that the result be reported to the assembly and they can set the times for reballoting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bob_Andrews Posted January 11, 2012 at 04:16 PM Report Share Posted January 11, 2012 at 04:16 PM Can I ask a rather "simple" question then?Isn't a tie nearly impossible according to Roberts Rules? In a situation where an election is taking place and a candidate needs a majority of votes to be declared candidate-elect, how can two candidates receive a majority of votes? Wouldn't the result truly be that no candidate received a majority and that a reballot must occur until a majority is received? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weldon Merritt Posted January 11, 2012 at 04:34 PM Report Share Posted January 11, 2012 at 04:34 PM Isn't a tie nearly impossible according to Roberts Rules?No; a tie is very much possible. Any time two (or more) candidates receive the same number of votes, that is a tie. Why do you think anything about RONR would make that "nearly impossible"?In a situation where an election is taking place and a candidate needs a majority of votes to be declared candidate-elect, how can two candidates receive a majority of votes?In an election for a single position, they cannot. In an election for several identical positions (say four undifferentiated members of a board of directors), it is possible. But I don't think that type of election is what you have in mind.Wouldn't the result truly be that no candidate received a majority and that a reballot must occur until a majority is received?Yes, if no candidate receives a majority, there is an incomplete election, requiring an additional round (or more) of voting until a candidate receives a majorty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bob_Andrews Posted January 11, 2012 at 05:13 PM Report Share Posted January 11, 2012 at 05:13 PM No; a tie is very much possible. Any time two (or more) candidates receive the same number of votes, that is a tie. Why do you think anything about RONR would make that "nearly impossible"?Ok, so I am confused. What comes first, the tie or the candidate not receiving a majority? I should have clarified initially, but I was referring to a single position election, not several positions (trustees or board example). In other words, if votes are tallied, and Candidate A and Candidate B have the same number of votes, its not possible for either one of them to receive a majority of the votes cast right, so the reballot would take place because a majority was not obtained, not because of a tie right? This is all semantics I know, chicken or the egg type discussion.I agree it is certainly possible in multi position elections as you have mentioned, but not for single elected positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weldon Merritt Posted January 11, 2012 at 06:49 PM Report Share Posted January 11, 2012 at 06:49 PM In other words, if votes are tallied, and Candidate A and Candidate B have the same number of votes, its not possible for either one of them to receive a majority of the votes cast right, so the reballot would take place because a majority was not obtained, not because of a tie right?Well, the reason a revote is required is that neither candidate received a majority. But in a two-candidate race, assuming there are no write-in votes (including votes for ineligible candidates), the only way for neither candidate to get a majority is for there to be a tie. Otherwise, if either candidate received more votes than the other, that candidate obviously would have recxeived a majority (i.e. more than half of the votes cast). This assumes, of course, that the election requires an unqualified "majority vote." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 12, 2012 at 03:06 AM Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 at 03:06 AM Isn't a tie nearly impossible according to Roberts Rules?No, it's quite possible.In a situation where an election is taking place and a candidate needs a majority of votes to be declared candidate-elect, how can two candidates receive a majority of votes? It can occur when there is an election for multiple identical positions. It is not possible when a single position is elected.Wouldn't the result truly be that no candidate received a majority and that a reballot must occur until a majority is received?Yes.What comes first, the tie or the candidate not receiving a majority?They both happen at the same time in the situation you have described. A tie means that two candidates or propositions have an equal number of votes. A majority is more than half the votes. As noted, it is impossible for more than one candidate to receive a majority vote when there is only one position up for election. In such a case, if two or more members tie for first place, then none of the candidates could have received a majority.In other words, if votes are tallied, and Candidate A and Candidate B have the same number of votes, its not possible for either one of them to receive a majority of the votes cast right, so the reballot would take place because a majority was not obtained, not because of a tie right?.Yes, you are correct that the reballot would take place because a majority vote was not obtained. A tie vote is handled the same as any other case in which no candidate receives a majority of the votes, but this doesn't change the mathematical fact that the candidates are tied. A tie vote is quite possible, but it rarely has any special significance.But in a two-candidate race, assuming there are no write-in votes (including votes for ineligible candidates), the only way for neither candidate to get a majority is for there to be a tie.I think this statement would be more accurate if you said "assuming there are no write-in votes or illegal votes." A vote for an ineligible candidate is not the only type of illegal vote, and all illegal votes are computed in determining if a candidate received a majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.