Questioning the validity of mail in proxy ballots

[Cybermentarian]

Recently in my organization, we had a vote regarding a sweeping change to the bylaws, it was a very contentious debate prior to the vote. After the votes of the members in attendance was split nearly 50/50 with the motion passing by a small majority, they announced the proxy ballot results which were overwhelmingly for the amendment change. Me and a few members were suspicious of this tally. In parliamentary procedure how can we challenge these votes to force them to be recounted and witnessed by the attending body? Is a simple call for division enough?

 

More information:

We do not use a secret ballot system. Each proxy ballot is signed and dated by the member mailing it in.

 

This amendment grants the board extremely overreaching control over the members and this board has had a lot of insider dealings going on. They are also the ones who tally and announce the votes of proxy ballots and this isn't the first time we have had suspicion of vote fraud as talking with members who mailed them in have given us contradictory information to the ballot system.

[George Mervosh]

See http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#10

[Cybermentarian]

14 minutes ago, George Mervosh said:

See http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#10

Thank you for responding, my question is more about challenging the count, as it is done "off camera" and we are just told the results, the idea being that since our bylaws, while not perfect, allow for mail in proxy ballots, we want to force the board to create a valid witness to the count as to remove any chance of fraud. Also, our organization's parliamentary procedure is appalling in so many ways the more I look into it. At no point does the board validate that a proxy ballot and an attending member are not both voting. The whole proxy vote system needs to be fixed, but I need to prove that there are double dealings and mishandling of proxies, before I can make motions to amend our bylaws to better patrol for these kinds of things.

Edited April 16, 2019 at 08:33 PM by Cybermentarian
A little more friendly hello!

[jstackpo]

The only literal vote-counting rule in RONR is that the President appoints the tellers, p. 414.  I would presume that they would count the proxy votes -- actually these appear to be simple absentee ballots, p. 423, unless your proxy rules (which have to be your rules) specify something different.

Are the tellers producing a full teller's report as on page 417?  That might give you some clues as to what is happening. 

With a 2/3 vote you could suspend the rule that authorized the president to appoint tellers, and appoint a new (trustworthy-?) set.  Then move for a recount - page 419.

Have you evidence of fraud.  See p. 444.

[Guest Zev]

2 hours ago, Cybermentarian said:

We do not use a secret ballot system. Each proxy ballot is signed and dated by the member mailing it in.

Why not establish a rule that these mailed-in proxies are opened and the ballot boxes are also opened and both counted in full view of the assembly? What is wrong with that?

[Josh Martin]

3 hours ago, Cybermentarian said:

Recently in my organization, we had a vote regarding a sweeping change to the bylaws, it was a very contentious debate prior to the vote. After the votes of the members in attendance was split nearly 50/50 with the motion passing by a small majority, they announced the proxy ballot results which were overwhelmingly for the amendment change. Me and a few members were suspicious of this tally. In parliamentary procedure how can we challenge these votes to force them to be recounted and witnessed by the attending body?

Make a motion “That the votes on the bylaw amendment relating to X be recounted, with the recount witnessed by the assembly.” A majority vote is required. As Dr. Stackpole notes, if you can muster a 2/3 vote, you could also suspend the rules in order to change how the tellers are appointed. Note that there are time limits related to ordering a recount.

“A recount may be ordered by the voting body, by a majority vote, at the same session at which the voting result was announced, or at the next regular session if that session is held within a quarterly time interval (see pp. 89–90). A recount may also be ordered at a special session properly called for that purpose, if held within a quarterly time interval of the session at which the voting result was announced and before the next regular session.” (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 419)

3 hours ago, Cybermentarian said:

Is a simple call for division enough?

No. The purpose and effect of a call for a Division of the Assembly is to require a rising vote after an inconclusive voice vote has been taken. It has no application when a ballot vote has been taken.

Edited April 16, 2019 at 10:23 PM by Josh Martin