Election of Officers in a House of Delegates

[rtpftguy]

I belong to a professional Association which has an Executive Office (EO), Board of Directors (BOD) and House of Delegates (HOD).  Delegates represent their State Affiliates in bringing matters to the attention of the BOD and by submitting a report about BOD and Association activities to their Affiliate BODs.

 

We have one set of bylaws for the Association, which is applicable to both the BOD and HOD.  Regarding voting, they have this to say:

"SECTION 6. VOTING

a. Each delegation shall have one (1) vote for each Active Member within their Chartered Affiliate as submitted by the Executive Office and certified by the House of Delegates Credentials Committee.

b. The House Speaker shall appoint the members of the House Credentials Committee from the House. This Committee shall certify the Delegation and number of votes each Delegation may cast."

 

It is the understanding of the HOD that this type of vote is what we refer to in our policies as a poll vote.  A roll call vote is taken, and a spreadsheet used to determine the total ayes and noes as in the sample below:

 

                            PRESENT ABSENT   YES VOTES YEA NO VOTES NO ABSENT VOTES

ALABAMA               1                                470         0.0                  0.0 0 

ALASKA                  1                                  65         0.0                  0.0 0

ARIZONA                1                                817         0.0                  0.0 0

ARKANSAS            1                                 561         0.0                  0.0 0

 

Members of the assembly are nominated for office and two Association committees in the summer; elections are held in the fall/winter meeting.

Regarding elections, our policy states (in its relevant part):

 

 

The election shall be by a majority of the valid votes cast during the fall House of Delegates meeting. If no candidate receives a majority, the election shall be decided by a runoff election of the two candidates receiving the highest number of votes. A tie poll vote between two candidates shall be decided by random drawing of their names from a container by the Chair of the Elections Committee. 

 

Another policy states:

 

1. Poll Vote - As provided in the AARC Bylaws, A delegation shall have one (1) vote for each Active Member within their Chartered Affiliate. A poll vote may be taken on any matter directly concerning the AARC membership. 

2. Ordinary Vote - All other matters that come up during the deliberations of the House shall be determined by vote of the delegations. Each delegation shall have one vote. 

 

I think that'll do for background.  My problem is that I can find no reference to this type of voting in RONR, so my questions are as follows:

 

1.  Am I correct that the policy cannot make the use of the poll vote more restrictive than it is in the bylaws?

2.  Should our elections, held by ballot, be handled as a poll vote?  It would require putting the Affiliate's name on each ballot and may require tellers who have been nominated for office to excuse themselves from tallying to protect the anonymity of the delegations' votes.

 

Thank you for your help

[Josh Martin]

My problem is that I can find no reference to this type of voting in RONR, so my questions are as follows:

 

Roll call votes (which your society calls "poll votes") are discussed in general in RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 420-423 and in the context of elections on pg. 443. This "vote of the delegations" thing is not found in RONR.

 

1.  Am I correct that the policy cannot make the use of the poll vote more restrictive than it is in the bylaws?

 

Yes. Nothing in the policies may conflict with the rules in the bylaws.

 

2.  Should our elections, held by ballot, be handled as a poll vote?

 

It's up to your organization to interpret its own bylaws. See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 588-591 for some Principles of Interpretation.

 

It would require putting the Affiliate's name on each ballot and may require tellers who have been nominated for office to excuse themselves from tallying to protect the anonymity of the delegations' votes.

 

There is no anonymity if a roll call vote is taken. That's the entire point of a roll call vote. (Although it's generally a good practice, in my opinion, for nominees to excuse themselves from serving as tellers anyway).

[rtpftguy]

Thank you, Josh, for your responses.

 

Yes, the closest mention in RONR is §45, p. 422, ll. 16-22.  But that is still an audible casting of the votes, definitely not desired in an election.

 

I agree that our House of Delegates should not have adopted a policy rule stating that a poll vote may be used only when it's a matter affecting the national membership.  I am to be their Parliamentarian this Summer and decided to pursue the RP credential.  I've found a number of things that have slipped by previous Parliamentarians and Speakers, perhaps because I'm the most AROC of the lot!

 

I'm sure you know that Standing Rules of Order, Standing Rules, and policies are meant to complement the bylaws.  I don't see anything ambiguous about Section 6. Voting a.  Further, §56, p. 589, ll. 33-34 states "4) If the bylaws authorize certain things specifically, other things of the same class are thereby prohibited."  Could this be applied to the method in which delegates vote-on everything?

 

Certainly a ballot vote upon which the Affiliate's name is placed is not truly anonymous.  However, only the elections committee and the Secretary will see these ballots.  I'll try to think of another way to combine the methods.

[Transpower]

My opinion is that the election not be held as a "poll" or "roll call" vote.  Secret votes are considered to better reflect the will of the assembly.

[Edgar Guest]

Certainly a ballot vote upon which the Affiliate's name is placed is not truly anonymous.  However, only the elections committee and the Secretary will see these ballots.  I'll try to think of another way to combine the methods.

 

If each member's individual vote is not recorded (i.e. announced at the meeting and entered into the minutes), why does anyone need to know how each member voted? Conversely, if all the members of the elections committee and the secretary know how each member voted, why can't every other member know?

[Timothy]

Secret votes are considered to better reflect the will of the assembly.

 

Perhaps, but "men love darkness because their deeds are evil." Accountability often causes people to do the right thing, even if their "will" is to do something else.

[Josh Martin]

I'm sure you know that Standing Rules of Order, Standing Rules, and policies are meant to complement the bylaws.  I don't see anything ambiguous about Section 6. Voting a.  Further, §56, p. 589, ll. 33-34 states "4) If the bylaws authorize certain things specifically, other things of the same class are thereby prohibited."  Could this be applied to the method in which delegates vote-on everything?

 

I think it could be quite reasonably argued that the policy "All other matters that come up during the deliberations of the House shall be determined by vote of the delegations. Each delegation shall have one vote." conflicts with the rule in your bylaws which provides that "Each delegation shall have one (1) vote for each Active Member within their Chartered Affiliate as submitted by the Executive Office and certified by the House of Delegates Credentials Committee." So far as I can determine, however, the part about the roll call votes doesn't conflict with the bylaws. The section you've cited from the bylaws doesn't specify how the vote shall be taken.

 

Certainly a ballot vote upon which the Affiliate's name is placed is not truly anonymous.  However, only the elections committee and the Secretary will see these ballots.  I'll try to think of another way to combine the methods.

 

A signed ballot is an acceptable alternative for a roll call vote. See RONR, 11th ed., pg. 420. The results will still be recorded in the minutes. The text also notes that in a convention, the roll is often called by delegation, so at least in that case only the members of a delegation would know how each individual member voted, while others would only know the vote totals for the delegations. See RONR, 11th ed., pg. 422. I suppose it would also be possible to combine these methods. That is, a member could sign his ballot and the minutes could record the vote totals by delegation. In this case, only the tellers will know how individual members voted and others will only know the vote totals for the delegations.

 

Still, perhaps in the long run it would be best to amend the rules.

[Edgar Guest]

I suppose it would also be possible to combine these methods. That is, a member could sign his ballot and the minutes could record the vote totals by delegation. In this case, only the tellers will know how individual members voted and others will only know the vote totals for the delegations.

 

I don't like the idea that only a select few will know how each member voted and I fail to see what's gained by that.

[Josh Martin]

I don't like the idea that only a select few will know how each member voted and I fail to see what's gained by that.

 

Well, for one thing, it will save a tremendous amount of space in the minutes if it's a large convention, and it will save a tremendous amount of time if an actual roll call vote is taken (rather than a signed ballot). I also suspect that in a convention, the interest of the constituency may be in how the delegations voted rather than how individual members voted.

[Edgar Guest]

Well, for one thing . . . 

 

Yes, that may be a reason not to record how each member voted. But I still don't understand why anyone (e.g. the elections committee and the secretary) has to know how anyone voted if everyone doesn't have to know that.

[rtpftguy]

Josh and Edgar,

 

Thank you very much for your dialogue on this topic.

 

A bit about the House of Delegates (HOD):  50 delegations, usually 2 delegates from each Chartered Affiliate, but 1-3 allowable.  Theoretically, delegates are supposed to receive instructions from their affiliate on how to vote on issues and that may be true for issues that may have an impact on members of the profession in that State.  I served for 7 yrs in the HOD and would say that my affiliate BOD always said, with regard to elections, "Well, YOU know who they are, vote for who you think is best." And I'm guessing that's pretty typical.  I would be surprised if many members of affiliate BODs could name the Speaker of the HOD.

 

Edgar,  it is my belief that the secrecy of the ballots should be preserved.  I think the best analogy to our process is to that of the electoral college.  In 2016, my State will have 9; the most populous state will have 55.  Applied to our situation, each delegation can cast one ballot, but if the Article in the bylaws is followed, one would be worth 9, one worth 55.  As in a roll call vote, a majority elects, but as I read it, it need not be a majority of the ballots cast, but a majority of the votes they represent.  We all know that you can win a majority of the States in a Presidential race, but lose the election.

 

So what I'm trying to think of is a way that the identity of the affiliate can be protected.  If there's an outer envelope with the affiliate name on it, one teller could look at the spreadsheet and identify the number of votes to which they're entitled.  Removing the folded ballot without looking at it, he/she writes that number on the outside and places it in a box, checks off the affiliate from the voting list.  When all ballots have been marked, another set of tellers open it and, with each ballot announce, "X number of votes for Mr./Ms. ___."  Another teller enters the information in a spreadsheet while a monitor watches and repeats, "X number of votes for ___."

 

How would I like to resolve this?  Amend the bylaws so that it's clear that, in elections and routine matters of HOD business, each delegation has one vote.  Only for matters affecting the membership at large will their vote be given the weight of the number of active members within their affiliate.

 

Let me know what you think about the ballot proposal and, if you know of a better way (we're not going to have an electronic voting system), please let me know.

[Edgar Guest]

Removing the folded ballot without looking at it . . . 

 

Put the ballot in a sealed inner envelope and I think you're good to go (see pp.424-425 for the "two-envelope" method).

[Josh Martin]

Yes, that may be a reason not to record how each member voted. But I still don't understand why anyone (e.g. the elections committee and the secretary) has to know how anyone voted if everyone doesn't have to know that.

 

Well, if you can figure out a way to pull that off while still meeting the requirements for a roll call vote, you let me know.

 

So what I'm trying to think of is a way that the identity of the affiliate can be protected.  If there's an outer envelope with the affiliate name on it, one teller could look at the spreadsheet and identify the number of votes to which they're entitled.  Removing the folded ballot without looking at it, he/she writes that number on the outside and places it in a box, checks off the affiliate from the voting list.  When all ballots have been marked, another set of tellers open it and, with each ballot announce, "X number of votes for Mr./Ms. ___."  Another teller enters the information in a spreadsheet while a monitor watches and repeats, "X number of votes for ___."

 

How would I like to resolve this?  Amend the bylaws so that it's clear that, in elections and routine matters of HOD business, each delegation has one vote.  Only for matters affecting the membership at large will their vote be given the weight of the number of active members within their affiliate.

 

If your rules require a roll call vote, you need to record how each delegation voted.

 

If they don't, this seems fine, and Edgar had a great suggestion to protect secrecy even further.