Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Voting


Guest Scott

Recommended Posts

The second place candidate would only be elected if that person was chosen on a majority of the ballots, which is not easy for a 2nd-place finisher to do.

It might be possible in a multi-way election for multiple seats, but in an election for a single office, the 2nd-place finisher cannot possibly have a majority.

If your election remains incomplete, you still need to complete it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe your question actually is:

When filling a vacancy on your executive board is the president allowed to vote being that it's an oral voice vote with in the board and he is the presiding officers. Please respond ASAP

It depends on the relative size of the board. If the number of positions on the board is about twelve or fewer, they would generally follow small board or assembly rules. If small assembly or small board rules are appropriate, the chair's duty to appear to be impartial is relaxed and they are permitted to make motions, speak in debate and vote; just as any other board member.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe your question actually is:

It depends on the relative size of the board. If the number of positions on the board is about twelve or fewer, they would generally follow small board or assembly rules. If small assembly or small board rules are appropriate, the chair's duty to appear to be impartial is relaxed and they are permitted to make motions, speak in debate and vote; just as any other board member.

I believe your question actually is:

It depends on the relative size of the board. If the number of positions on the board is about twelve or fewer, they would generally follow small board or assembly rules. If small assembly or small board rules are appropriate, the chair's duty to appear to be impartial is relaxed and they are permitted to make motions, speak in debate and vote; just as any other board member.

You are correct ..the problem that we are have is the preisdent is not being impartial and has basically forced his vote onto other executive members... The vote was 3-1-1 the president didn't vote then later that afternoon he said it was 3-2 and he was voting forcing 3-3 tie...I have read that presiding officer should remain impartial and not vote..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are correct ..the problem that we are have is the preisdent is not being impartial and has basically forced his vote onto other executive members... The vote was 3-1-1 the president didn't vote then later that afternoon he said it was 3-2 and he was voting forcing 3-3 tie...I have read that presiding officer should remain impartial and not vote..

What's the 3-1-1? Was there a vote between a number of different candidates? Or was this a vote to approve a particular candidate, with 3 in favor, 1 opposed, 1 abstention?

And, in the latter case, what would be the point of the president trying to maneuver the results into a tie (since tie vote defeats a motion)?

And what do you mean by 'later that afternoon' -- was this sometime after the meeting adjourned??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the 3-1-1? Was there a vote between a number of different candidates? Or was this a vote to approve a particular candidate, with 3 in favor, 1 opposed, 1 abstention?

And, in the latter case, what would be the point of the president trying to maneuver the results into a tie (since tie vote defeats a motion)?

And what do you mean by 'later that afternoon' -- was this sometime after the meeting adjourned??

The vote break down went like this 3 votes for one candidate 1 vote for another candidate and 1 vote for another...those vote can from the 5 executive boards members left with 1 vacancy and without the preisdent's voting ...this vote was done via email. Later that afternoon the president was told that he gets a vote....the 1 vote for a single candidate was not sent over the email it was sent through a phone call. The president then contacted him and and told him to send and email. In the email he changed his vote to go with the other single vote making it 3 for one candidate and 2 for the other.. The president then said I'm voting tieing it up at 3-3...reason this is all going on is because are union is some what divided by senior and junior officers and much as I regret to say it. We just had an election and all junior officers were voted in so the board is mad up of 2 senior eboard members and 3 junior eboard members and the preisdent is a senior officer so u can see why the officer that one is not wanted in is because he is a junior officer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it not in are bylaws and I informed him of that..my main concern is we have a meeting tonight and the president is not being impartial and is pushing for the person he wants who didn't even what he position on the e board...

Take a look at FAQ #1 for some comments about the chair's duty of impartiality. Since none of the email voting done so far counts for anything, you need to start over with voting anyway. One thing that might help is to do the voting by ballot -- that way you have privacy about who votes which way, and the president can just vote (secretly) along with anyone else. Someone would make a motion to take the vote by ballot -- majority decides. In an election, if there is a tie, you would hold repeated rounds of balloting until one candidate gets a majority. New nominations can be made, and write-in votes are permitted (unless specifically prohibited by your bylaws).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...