Non-Secret Ballot - Violation of RRNO

[Elbie]

Our organization's requires written ballots be mailed to all members for the election of officers and directors and for bylaw changes. The bylaw reads: " 9.2 - ELECTION MEETING - The election of Complex officers and directors shall be conducted by mailed or delivered ballot received by the second Tuesday in September in odd-numbered years. Ballots will be collected by the Treasurer and checked against the current membership list. The President will appoint three members at large to count the ballots and the results will be tabulated by the Secretary and announced to the membership when completed."

In the past ballots were sent to each member and an envelope was included so that the ballot could be returned by mail. On the back of the return envelope the member's name was printed. When the envelope with the ballot was returned, the name was checked against the membership list and, if valid, the envelope was held for counting. At the next meeting a group of three people took the envelopes, opened them, removed the ballots and put them in a pile. The envelopes were discarded. The three people would then split the pile of ballots and count the votes. This system worked very well.

I just received my ballot for this year's election and bylaw changes. The names of the nominees are listed and next to them it says: "For" and "Against". I do not believe that this is appropriate.  Secondly, Directly under the list of nominees and before the proposed bylaw changes, the ballot "asks" that the member's  put their name so that membership can be verified. Anyone counting the ballot will then be able to see from whom the ballot came. There is no secrecy. Thirdly, there is no envelope to return the ballot as there always has been in the past.

I talked to the Treasurer who sent out the ballots and he said that "he didn't care if this the right way to do the balloting." He is not running again for office.

The bylaws of our organization require that Robert's Rules of Order be followed unless otherwise stated in the bylaws. I believe that this election process and balloting is not in accordance with RRNO.

I would appreciate any info, comments and/or advise.

Thank you, Elaine Tabacinski

[Richard Brown]

The method planned for use in this election is not proper according to RONR.  For openers, a vote by ballot means a secret ballot unless the rules provide otherwise (RONR pages 412-413).  Second, the procedures for a mail vote being utilized do not conform to the rules in RONR for a mail vote. 

 

Among the discrepancies are the "for and against" vote for officers (see pages 412-414), requiring that the members put their names on the ballots (same citation), and not using the proper return envelope  procedures (pages 424-425).

 

Edited to add:  You are correct on all counts. 

[Josh Martin]

Our organization's requires written ballots be mailed to all members for the election of officers and directors and for bylaw changes. The bylaw reads: " 9.2 - ELECTION MEETING - The election of Complex officers and directors shall be conducted by mailed or delivered ballot received by the second Tuesday in September in odd-numbered years. Ballots will be collected by the Treasurer and checked against the current membership list. The President will appoint three members at large to count the ballots and the results will be tabulated by the Secretary and announced to the membership when completed."

 

In the past ballots were sent to each member and an envelope was included so that the ballot could be returned by mail. On the back of the return envelope the member's name was printed. When the envelope with the ballot was returned, the name was checked against the membership list and, if valid, the envelope was held for counting. At the next meeting a group of three people took the envelopes, opened them, removed the ballots and put them in a pile. The envelopes were discarded. The three people would then split the pile of ballots and count the votes. This system worked very well.

 

I just received my ballot for this year's election and bylaw changes. The names of the nominees are listed and next to them it says: "For" and "Against". I do not believe that this is appropriate.  Secondly, Directly under the list of nominees and before the proposed bylaw changes, the ballot "asks" that the member's  put their name so that membership can be verified. Anyone counting the ballot will then be able to see from whom the ballot came. There is no secrecy. Thirdly, there is no envelope to return the ballot as there always has been in the past.

 

I talked to the Treasurer who sent out the ballots and he said that "he didn't care if this the right way to do the balloting." He is not running again for office.

The bylaws of our organization require that Robert's Rules of Order be followed unless otherwise stated in the bylaws. I believe that this election process and balloting is not in accordance with RRNO.

 

I would appreciate any info, comments and/or advise.

 

The requirement that members place their signatures on the ballot is the most severe of the violations, and my advice would be to raise a Point of Order at the next meeting that the election is invalid on those grounds and must be redone. Follow this with an Appeal if necessary. There may be some disagreement on whether a secret ballot is required by the bylaws (see below), but given past practice, I think the argument on your side is strong.

 

The method planned for use in this election is not proper according to RONR.  For openers, a vote by ballot means a secret ballot unless the rules provide otherwise (RONR pages 412-413).  Second, the procedures for a mail vote being utilized do not conform to the rules in RONR for a mail vote. 

 

Among the discrepancies are the "for and against" vote for officers (see pages 412-414), requiring that the members put their names on the ballots (same citation), and not using the proper return envelope  procedures (pages 424-425).

 

Edited to add:  You are correct on all counts. 

 

In the context of a mail vote, the term "ballot" does not necessarily indicate that the vote is to be secret. The term "ballot" is used for both secret and non-secret votes in such cases (as opposed to a vote in person, in which case the term "ballot" is presumed to mean a secret vote unless otherwise indicated). This will ultimately be a question of bylaws interpretation for the society to resolve, although the fact that the society has used the method for conducting a secret vote by mail in the past certainly supports the interpretation that a secret ballot is required. I would personally go with this interpretation based on the facts provided.

[Guest Elaine Tabacinski]

It has been awhile since I first asked my question. After reading the replies to my questions, I wrote an email to all the Officers and Directors of the Complex, as well as, those people who were running for an office and quoted the voting procedures given in  RONR. I explained that the elections for officers, directors and for bylaw changes was in violation of RONR because no return envelope was included with the ballot and that was specified in Article VIII, #46 and had been done in the last three elections. I received only one replay that said that "they were not running for office again." I could not attend the meeting when the ballots were counted because I was away. Apparently the ballots were counted and all the new bylaw changes were approved. The changes in the bylaws include a new bylaw that says that only people that show up at the September meeting can vote for officers, etc. and that a quorum now means "those that show up for a meeting". At this point I cannot think of anything that can be done about the illegal way this election was handled??? I might also mention that only 100 people returned a ballot out of a membership of 400+ and many of those members are from out of state and will not be able to attend an election meeting.

[Josh Martin]

At this point I cannot think of anything that can be done about the illegal way this election was handled???

 

At the next meeting, raise a Point of Order that the election is null and void due to the requirement that members place their signatures on the ballots, and raise an Appeal if this point is ruled not well taken. Ultimately, the membership will decide.

 

I might also mention that only 100 people returned a ballot out of a membership of 400+ and many of those members are from out of state and will not be able to attend an election meeting.

 

A poor response rate in a mail vote violates no rule in RONR. The fact that the assembly has amended its bylaws so that all voting takes place at a meeting also violates no rule in RONR (in fact, this is the usual arrangement).