Election Irregularities

[Guest tonystrux]

I am a statewide candidate for Secretary in a fraternal organization and there were several issues I have questions about. Our By-Laws state that each Lodge will cast their ballots at their first meeting in June in OPEN LODGE.

First, at least two Lodges did not meet at all, yet ballots were mailed in to the state office. (Changes in meeting nights must be approved by the State President)

Second, One Lodge had a quorum at their first meeting and waited until the next meeting because there were people missing.

Third, at least two Lodges took their ballots into another room to count, and one of them did not announce the tally.

I also am curious if Candidates on the ballot can be Tellers in their own Lodge or if Statewide Tellers can also be Tellers in their own local Lodge.

There is nothing in our code for challenging votes so RRO would step in. How is it covered

FYI I have an overwhelming lead but a majority of all votes cast is needed. One or two votes could make all the difference

[Tim Wynn]

I also am curious if Candidates on the ballot can be Tellers in their own Lodge or if Statewide Tellers can also be Tellers in their own local Lodge.

They can.

As for the rest of your post, I could not identify a specific question.

[Gary c Tesser]

1. "Our By-Laws state that each Lodge will cast their ballots at their first meeting in June in OPEN LODGE.

First, at least two Lodges did not meet at all, yet ballots were mailed in to the state office ..."

This seems to be a violation of the bylaws. Guest_tonystrux, don't you think so? But I don't think that we can say, over the Internet, whether this would invalidate those ballots; it would require tons more information than the pipes can handle.

I don't see a problem with your second point, unless the bylaws actually prohibit postponing the balloting to another meeting.

As to the third point, it's unobjectionable, unsurprising, even unremarkable that the tellers go somewhere else to count the ballots, although it is not uncommon, either, for them to do their tallying right in front of everybody (RONR, 11th Ed., p. 415). And yes, the tellers should have divulged the results and the chairman should have announced them (probably the next page but I'm not gonna open the book again, not at no 5:42 AM and no $4.50 an hour, I'm not) -- but unless there's good reason to suspect that the results were falsified, I don't any legitimate kick.

And no, no such restrictions on tellers in RONR (but see p. 414 and 407 if you really want to).