Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Voting Method Conundrum


flipper92

Recommended Posts

Every few years we elect members to a standing committee that has 6 people on it. Since terms on this committee last for two election cycles, we never have to replace everyone at once. Typically we have three openings, and exactly three people who run, so they all make it on. This year we have four openings and seven people running. Our by-laws are silent on voting methods/requirements, so here is the question: some have suggested that on the ballot we should only be able to vote for four of the seven, since there are four spots open. Others have said that Approval Voting is more standard in this scenario, where you can vote for as many people as you would "approve" to fill those spots. Is there a default? We usually do a ballot vote, so the wording on the ballot is crucial here. Again, in the past, these two methods would have looked identical because the # of candidates equalled the number of slots. In either case, how many votes would each person have to make it on the committee? Would it simply be the top four vote-getters, or would each have to receive a majority of votes cast to be on the committee at all? (6 is the max # on the committee, but it is not required). It seems that with Approval Voting, you are more likely to get more candidates to reach that majority threshold. Help!

 

Flipper92

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every few years we elect members to a standing committee that has 6 people on it. Since terms on this committee last for two election cycles, we never have to replace everyone at once. Typically we have three openings, and exactly three people who run, so they all make it on. This year we have four openings and seven people running. Our by-laws are silent on voting methods/requirements, so here is the question: some have suggested that on the ballot we should only be able to vote for four of the seven, since there are four spots open. Others have said that Approval Voting is more standard in this scenario, where you can vote for as many people as you would "approve" to fill those spots. Is there a default? We usually do a ballot vote, so the wording on the ballot is crucial here. Again, in the past, these two methods would have looked identical because the # of candidates equalled the number of slots. In either case, how many votes would each person have to make it on the committee? Would it simply be the top four vote-getters, or would each have to receive a majority of votes cast to be on the committee at all? (6 is the max # on the committee, but it is not required). It seems that with Approval Voting, you are more likely to get more candidates to reach that majority threshold. Help!

 

Flipper92

 

Members can vote for up to, but no more than, four candidates.

 

"In an election of members of a board or committee in which votes are cast in one section of the ballot for multiple positions on the board or committee, every ballot with a vote for one or more candidates is counted as one vote cast, and a candidate must receive a majority of the total of such votes to be elected. In such a case, if more than the prescribed number receive a majority vote, the places are filled by the proper number receiving the largest number of votes. If less than the proper number receive a majority vote, those who do have a majority are elected, and all others remain as candidates for the necessary repeated balloting. Similarly, if some individuals receive a majority but are tied for the lowest position that would elect, all of them also remain as candidates on the next ballot."  (RONR, 11th ed., p. 441)

 

There is no such thing as "Approval Voting" in RONR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Key statement in your posting:

 

"Our by-laws are silent on voting methods/requirements,"

 

Presuming you have RONR as your default parliamentary authority (Do you?  Check the bylaws!),

then voting for up to as many positions as are up for election, but NO MORE, is the standard.  Candidates must get a majority of the votes cast (not just a plurality) to win and take office.

 

If you want to use "Approval Voting", you would have to amend the bylaws to authorize it as a departure from RONR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So say two people pass the majority threshold: the other five go on the next ballot, and everyone votes for one person to fill the remaining spot? What if no one gets a majority of votes in the first go-around, or in the run-off in the second round? Is that slot vacant? (our bylaws allow the exec committee to fill vacancies in committees between elections).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So say two people pass the majority threshold: the other five go on the next ballot, and everyone votes for one person to fill the remaining spot? What if no one gets a majority of votes in the first go-around, or in the run-off in the second round? Is that slot vacant? (our bylaws allow the exec committee to fill vacancies in committees between elections).

 

You continue voting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So say two people pass the majority threshold: the other five go on the next ballot, and everyone votes for one person to fill the remaining spot? What if no one gets a majority of votes in the first go-around, or in the run-off in the second round? Is that slot vacant? (our bylaws allow the exec committee to fill vacancies in committees between elections).

 

If, as you said, there are four open slots, and if only two candidates attain a majority, why is there only one remaining slot to fill?  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If two people receive a majority of the votes cast on the first round of balloting, then they are elected and the five remaining candidates remain on the ballot for another round of balloting. But you said that there are four positions open, so you would vote for up to two candidates on the second round. Keep voting until you have elected enough people to fill all the available positions. No names are dropped from subsequent ballots unless they have been elected.

 

But you said that, while you typically have three positions open for each election cycle, this time you have four. Do these four positions all have identical terms, or is the extra position open at this time because someone has left before their term is up? If the latter, then you should ballot for that position separately from the other three, since the term of office for that position should be for the remainder of  the original term. Can you clarify why you have an additional position open for this election?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you said that, while you typically have three positions open for each election cycle, this time you have four. Do these four positions all have identical terms, or is the extra position open at this time because someone has left before their term is up? If the latter, then you should ballot for that position separately from the other three, since the term of office for that position should be for the remainder of  the original term. Can you clarify why you have an additional position open for this election?

 

Good point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry for the confusion: we have four slots open. All are equal terms. In the past someone must have left early and possibly the vacancy was filled through appointment rather than ballot (as provided per the by-laws)

 

To clarify the hypothetical: 3 attain majority, 4 remaining then get voted on to fill the 1 remaining slot. If no one receives a majority on the second ballot, then all 4 are voted on again, and again, until one of them gets a majority? Like how the Pope is elected? And no removal of low vote-getter in each round?

 

Follow-up: what does RR say about reporting the results? Do we say what % people received if less than majority before doing the second ballot, or just that they failed to achieve the majority threshold?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct (except I can't speak for the pope!) in all respects. (I think the Pope needs 2/3 to win.)

 

At any point in the (endless-?) cycle, anyone can move to re-open nominations (majority vote) and everyone can offer other names as nominations.  One of the newbies might be a "dark horse" candidate who would be victorious. Or a write-in campaign could take place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Follow-up: what does RR say about reporting the results? Do we say what % people received if less than majority before doing the second ballot, or just that they failed to achieve the majority threshold?

 

For each round of voting, the tellers' report should indicate how many votes each candidate received (whether they were elected or not) and the tellers' report should be included in the minutes. See pp.417-418 for a sample tellers' report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct (except I can't speak for the pope!) in all respects. (I think the Pope needs 2/3 to win.)

 

At any point in the (endless-?) cycle, anyone can move to re-open nominations (majority vote) and everyone can offer other names as nominations.  One of the newbies might be a "dark horse" candidate who would be victorious. Or a write-in campaign could take place.

And nominees, especially the one with the smallest number of votes, might voluntarily withdraw.  He can do so voluntarily, but can't be forced to unless you adopt a motion requiring it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And even if you do pass a motion "requiring" him to withdraw  --  actually the motion is to take him off the ballot, and it requires 2/3 as it is a "suspend the rules and..." motion  --  he can still get legitimate votes via write-ins.  p. 441.  And even win if enough folks feel sorry for the way he was treated, and vote for him anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...