Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Tie Membership Election


Guest Rob

Recommended Posts

Do your bylaws specifically authorize the use of mail-in ballots?  If they don't then you can't use them (RONR pp. 423-424).  If the bylaws do authorize mail in voting then they should also include all of the details on how the vote is to take place and how to proceed in the case of an incomplete election..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah Chris -- and he especially says, "there are mail in ballots and ballots distributed at the annual meeting" (citation that it's especially dopy to combine in-person voting with absentee voting, around p. 430). But aside from beating Rob up and bawling him out, and since the bylaws are probably outstandingly useless here and now, can we tell him anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the bylaws don't provide for the use of mail-in ballots then I would say that a member should raise a Point of Order that all of the mail-in ballots are invalid based on RONR p. 251 (d) and the Chair should rule the Point Well Taken.  Then they would just work from the votes that took place at the meeting (hopefully they would  have some way to differentiate between the present and absent ballots-otherwise the whole election would need to be held again).  If then there was an incomplete election (no one got a majority vote) they would keep on voting until someone did get elected.

 

On the other hand, if the bylaws do provide for absentee voting I think the organization has ventured outside of the map of the well trodden  trails which is RONR and into the deep and thick thicket.  Hopefully they have a nice and sharp machete to navigate the hazards which don't exist on the well traveled trails.   :o  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal machete would tell them (block that metaphore)  that, unless there is a tie-breaking mechanism in the bylaws  --  unlikely else why pose the question in the first place --  they will have to redo the election including sending ballots out to ALL the members, not just the ones who voted first time around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal machete would tell them (block that metaphore)  that, unless there is a tie-breaking mechanism in the bylaws  --  unlikely else why pose the question in the first place --  they will have to redo the election including sending ballots out to ALL the members, not just the ones who voted first time around.

 

And I'd be cautious (unless it's found in the bylaws) of those who might want to treat the situation as if it were a mid-term vacancy, and, for instance, have the rest of the Directors appoint someone to the unfilled position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I'd be cautious (unless it's found in the bylaws) of those who might want to treat the situation as if it were a mid-term vacancy, and, for instance, have the rest of the Directors appoint someone to the unfilled position.

 

Well, if the bylaws provide that directors shall serve for a fixed term, such as "one year" (with no "and until ...", "or until ...", or the like appended), then there may well be a mid-term vacancy if positions are not filled at the meeting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this mean you are defining an "incomplete election" as a concept applicable only to terms of office with "or until..." or "and until..." qualifier?  

 

John, see this until Dan gets back.  http://robertsrules.forumflash.com/index.php?/topic/19676-incomplete-elections-vs-vacancies/  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if the bylaws provide that directors shall serve for a fixed term, such as "one year" (with no "and until ...", "or until ...", or the like appended), then there may well be a mid-term vacancy if positions are not filled at the meeting.

 

Oops. OK, no need for caution, just awareness that it might be an option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...