Election nullified?

[Guest Sarah]

If it was found out, after an election, that one of the people who signed their ballot form, our chair at the time, had not been in good standing at the time of the election, does that mean those two elected members are not actually supposed to be on the board? Found out, the office let him pay a tiny portion of his past dues but it was already past the deadline for ballots to be turned in, signed.

Does it nullify any action he took during the time he was not in good standing?

He has since resigned because a host of other unethical behavior but we still deal with residual effects of his rogue behavior and those two members are still on the board.

[Guest Edgar]

If it was found out, after an election, that one of the people who signed their ballot form, our chair at the time, had not been in good standing at the time of the election, does that mean those two elected members are not actually supposed to be on the board?

If his vote could have made a difference in the outcome of the elections (or any other motions that were adopted) you may have some work to do. Otherwise it's time to move on.

[Guest Sarah]

Not only did his actions produce major changes, sometimes without board approval, hence a reason for eventual resignation but the two board members elected could not have been elected without him signing their petitions.

[Guest Edgar]

But were any of the questions he voted on (including elections) decided by just one vote?

[Guest Sarah]

Not sure.

But, those members petitions had to be signed by five people in good standing among our general membership, and he was one of those five signatures. He was not in good standing when those petitions were turned in and the deadline passed.

[Guest Sarah]

Could he, as chair, brought motions to board? Implemented programs never voted on? Changed agreements with other organizations?

All while not in good standing?

[Josh Martin]

If it was found out, after an election, that one of the people who signed their ballot form, our chair at the time, had not been in good standing at the time of the election, does that mean those two elected members are not actually supposed to be on the board?

If that one vote would have made a difference, yes.

Does it nullify any action he took during the time he was not in good standing?

Any action? Certainly not. It's not possible to make such a sweeping statement about this. An important principle is that in most cases, a Point of Order must be raised at the time of the violation. There are a few violations which are so egregious that this is not the case. But it's going to be too late to complain about most of the actions.

I concur with Edgar that it might be a reason to rule that a motion is null and void if it can be shown that his vote could have made a difference. Beyond that, I'm not sure. I suspect you'll need to look carefully at the facts of each case.

But, those members petitions had to be signed by five people in good standing among our general membership, and he was one of those five signatures. He was not in good standing when those petitions were turned in and the deadline passed.

What is the purpose of these petitions? If the petitions are the method by which candidates are nominated, it's immaterial at this point. A flaw in the nominations process does not constitute a continuing breach. So long as each candidate won the election by more than one vote, that election is valid.

Could he, as chair, brought motions to board?

No, but it's too late to raise a Point of Order about that now.

Implemented programs never voted on? Changed agreements with other organizations?

I'd set aside the "good standing" issue for a moment and see if your Bylaws actually grant the chair the authority to take those actions unilaterally. RONR does not grant such authority. Also check to see if your Bylaws require members to be in good standing to hold office.

If not, or if the member was not validly in the position, the actions may be null and void... but you may need legal advice as well, if the "agreements with other organizations" are in the nature of contracts.

[Guest Sarajevo]

They were contracts and he actually did things in them our board would have never approved.

So those two members should not be on our board?

One is me, but I'm ok. I don't want anything he did wrong staying in our board.

He's done enough damage already.

And he was extremely inappropriate to me, even sending me 'pictures' and even though he resigned is still able to coach in our league. Not understanding why it's allowed.

[Josh Martin]

They were contracts and he actually did things in them our board would have never approved.

Then your organization should consult a lawyer.

So those two members should not be on our board?

If both candidates won election by only one vote, yes.

And he was extremely inappropriate to me, even sending me 'pictures' and even though he resigned is still able to coach in our league. Not understanding why it's allowed.

That's beyond the scope of RONR and this forum. You'll have to look at the league's rules, and perhaps look into adopting some new ones.

[Guest Sarah]

Where does it state in Roberts rules that a chair cannot bring motions to the board?

[Josh Martin]

Where does it state in Roberts rules that a chair cannot bring motions to the board?

In the normal case, "cannot" isn't quite correct. See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 394-395, but also see pgs. 487-488. I was under the impression that your main concern was that the chair was not in good standing, which could mean he was not eligible to serve as chair (see your Bylaws). In that case, he couldn't make motions because he wasn't really a member. See RONR, 11th ed., pg. 3, lines 1-5.

In any event, it's too late to raise a Point of Order about that now. See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 250-251.