Lori Barnes Posted November 27, 2012 at 03:30 PM Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 at 03:30 PM We are trying to determine the most appropriate way to break a three or four way tie vote for an elected officer position. Currently, our election process allows three or more names to appear on the ballot for any one position, for example Chair or Vice-Chair. Voting proceeds continually with the candidate with the least number of votes dropping off the ballot until one candidate receives a simple majority. In the case where we might have a three or four way tie with each candidate receiving an equal number of votes, is it appropriate to draw lots to determine who proceeds to the next ballot. In other words, if we have 12 votes and a split of four votes each for three different candidates on the first ballot, we would draw lots twice; each name drawn would allow the candidate to remain ON the ballot for the next vote. The remaining name NOT drawn would be dropped off the ballot. We think this is in keeping with our usual practice where two candidates are tied 6/6 and we draw lots for the winner. Is there some kind of official language to cover this or is it included in Robert's somewhere? Thanks for any assistance anyone can provide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted November 27, 2012 at 04:20 PM Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 at 04:20 PM Is there some kind of official language to cover this or is it included in Robert's somewhere?If no one is elected on the first round of voting (e.g. there is a tie), you hold additional rounds of voting until someone is elected. No automatic dropping of candidates from the ballot. No drawing lots. Unless, of course, your rules say otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted November 27, 2012 at 04:57 PM Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 at 04:57 PM If Lori's problem (of ties or even very close multiple candidate races) persists in future elections, she might want to look into the Borda Count method of ranking candidates and tabulating votes.It isn't an RONR "approved" method (but it should be) so you will need special bylaw rules to put it in place. Google "Borda" and you will be overwhelmed with information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Barnes Posted November 27, 2012 at 08:09 PM Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 at 08:09 PM If no one is elected on the first round of voting (e.g. there is a tie), you hold additional rounds of voting until someone is elected. No automatic dropping of candidates from the ballot. No drawing lots. Unless, of course, your rules say otherwise.Thanks for your quick response. Drawing of lots is in our by-laws (throughout) as an affirmative method of selecting someone when there is a two-way tie. We have never had to use if for three or four way tie, hence the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Barnes Posted November 27, 2012 at 08:10 PM Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 at 08:10 PM If Lori's problem (of ties or even very close multiple candidate races) persists in future elections, she might want to look into the Borda Count method of ranking candidates and tabulating votes.It isn't an RONR "approved" method (but it should be) so you will need special bylaw rules to put it in place. Google "Borda" and you will be overwhelmed with information.I will do that. I love to be overwhelmed with information, but of course! Thanks for the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted November 27, 2012 at 08:50 PM Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 at 08:50 PM Drawing of lots is in our by-laws (throughout) as an affirmative method of selecting someone when there is a two-way tie. We have never had to use if for three or four way tie, hence the question.I may not fully understand your procedure but it seems to me that if you have a two-way tie and draw lots for the winner (i.e. no next round of voting), then you should do the same for a three-way tie. Put all the names in a hat and draw out the winning name. In other words, why would you treat a three-way tie any differently than you would a two-way tie? Or is it that drawing the winner out of a hat is only authorized for a two-way tie and so you're trying to get to that point.In any case, I'm afraid you'll have to figure out for yourselves the proper application of your own customized rules as we try to limit ourselves to explicating RONR here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted November 27, 2012 at 11:53 PM Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 at 11:53 PM Thanks for your quick response. Drawing of lots is in our by-laws (throughout) as an affirmative method of selecting someone when there is a two-way tie. We have never had to use if for three or four way tie, hence the question.Since it's your organization's customized rule, your organization will need to interpret it and determine whether it applies in this situation. See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 588-591 for some Principles of Interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Barnes Posted November 29, 2012 at 08:00 PM Author Report Share Posted November 29, 2012 at 08:00 PM I may not fully understand your procedure but it seems to me that if you have a two-way tie and draw lots for the winner (i.e. no next round of voting), then you should do the same for a three-way tie. Put all the names in a hat and draw out the winning name. In other words, why would you treat a three-way tie any differently than you would a two-way tie? Or is it that drawing the winner out of a hat is only authorized for a two-way tie and so you're trying to get to that point.In any case, I'm afraid you'll have to figure out for yourselves the proper application of your own customized rules as we try to limit ourselves to explicating RONR here.Our by-laws are currently silent on a three way tie; but we currently draw lots to break a two-way tie. I feel, as Edgar suggested, that a three way tie should be treated the same as a two-way tie. Unfortunately, the wording is not specific enough in the current by-law and may cause our elected officials some concern during the election of officers portion of our Inaurugal Meeting. Here is what the by-laws currently state.Where no majority is received, where there are more than two candidates, the candidate receiving the least number of votes shall be dropped and the election will continue from among those remaining until one candidate receives a majority. Where there is an equality of votes between twocandidates, the candidates shall draw lots. " END OF CURRENT BY-LAWNominations must be made and secondedAll elections shall be by secret ballotAll ballots shall be counted by the Director of Education and the Senior Manager, Board and Trustee Services in the presence of a scrutineer supplied by the Board’s auditing firm. There will be separate votes for each of the two trustee positions elected to serve on Chair’s Committee. To be declared elected to any position, the winning candidate must have received a simple majority (50% plus one) of ballots cast by trustees present. An incomplete ballot for any elected position will be considered a spoiled ballot. The total number of ballots used to determine a simple majority will be reduced by one for each spoiled ballot.PROPOSED ADDITION FOR NEXT TIME - The drawing of a lot is an affirmative vote in favour of a candidate. In the case of a two way tie, the lot drawn will be declared the winner. In the case of a three or four way tie, each lot drawn will result in that candidate remaining on the ballot for the next vote to declare a winner by simple majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Lages Posted November 29, 2012 at 08:23 PM Report Share Posted November 29, 2012 at 08:23 PM Your bylaws seem to expend a lot of energy and wording defining nomination and election procedures. Unless your organization feels these procedures are necessary for your (collectively) specific circumstances, you might want to consider dropping all of this language and using the much simpler and more direct time-tested and proven methods described in RONR. See RONR, 11th ed., Ch. XIV on Nominations and Elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted November 29, 2012 at 08:26 PM Report Share Posted November 29, 2012 at 08:26 PM . . . you might want to consider dropping all of this language . . .Yes, I'm afraid the "red" language is no better than the "green" language. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.