Revote on invalidated ballots

[Drake Savory]

A group of votes for officers of the organization from certain reporting sites are invalid under the bylaws (votes and voter numbers don't match).  A member of the Board wants a revote saying nothing in the bylaws prevents a recount (yes I know, nothing in the bylaws prevent the President from robbing a bank either).  Noticably absent from these discussions is an actual copy of the Election Committee's rules - instead the discussion is all about "what we have always done",  "what is fair" etc.  The question is, are there ANY circumstances where a body can have a revote of a balloted election of officers assuming the election followed all rules and if so, can it only be selected votes or would it have to be everybody?

[Rob Elsman]

Per se, there is nothing invalidating about the fact that the number of ballots returned is less than the number of ballots issued. It is not improper for a member to tear up his ballot, stick it in his pocket, and walk out.

[Drake Savory]

But not per se - per bylaws.

There were more ballots than voter signatures.

Edited April 21, 2019 at 02:21 AM by Drake Savory

[Rob Elsman]

Well, then, they're your bylaws, you tell us.

[Drake Savory]

Dude seriously.  If there were rules on revoting in the bylaws do you think I'd be asking here on what the rules are?

[Rob Elsman]

Insofar as I have some precious few facts, I see insufficient reason to have another vote. However, my experience on this forum has taught me that just a little, tiny change in the facts can have really big effects on the appropriate answer. Is there anything more to this?

[Joshua Katz]

Okay, if you two are done, I'm unclear on exactly what the board member is requesting (and the board member might be also):

30 minutes ago, Drake Savory said:

A member of the Board wants a revote saying nothing in the bylaws prevents a recount

Does the board member want to hold the election again, or to count the votes again?

31 minutes ago, Drake Savory said:

The question is, are there ANY circumstances where a body can have a revote of a balloted election of officers assuming the election followed all rules and if so, can it only be selected votes or would it have to be everybody?

 

11 minutes ago, Drake Savory said:

There were more ballots than voter signatures.

It seems to me that, if the voter signatures are your organization's way of maintaining security when turning in ballots (which is the better way to do it, in my opinion, as opposed to limiting distribution of ballots), then, in fact, all the rules were not followed - at least, not by all the voters. The question then becomes - could the violation have impacted the outcome? If the number of additional ballots exceeds the margin of decision, it seems to me that invalidating the election and holding a new election is appropriate. Otherwise, I think it would not be appropriate. 

I can't answer the part about selected votes or everyone, because I'm not sure what it means. I've been assuming that you used unsigned ballots, because otherwise you wouldn't have a mystery regarding the extra ballots - but, in that case, I'm not clear on how you could have only some people vote again - how would you know who should vote again, and which old ballots should count? In any case, mixing old and new ballots is not proper. If an election is invalidated and a new one held, no old ballots should be mixed in and counted.

[Rob Elsman]

Well, aside from all the confusion, there are limits within which an election can be contested, and it might well be that the time has expired, regardless of the irregularities that are alleged.

RONR has a whole lot to say about elections. Oddly enough, people seem to want to know about elections only afterward. It would be better for all involved to get hold of copies of RONR and do your training before an election, so all the contention after the election can be avoided.

[Drake Savory]

Sorry, read as a member of the Board wants a revote saying nothing in the bylaws prevents a revote.

 

[Drake Savory]

3 minutes ago, reelsman said:

 Oddly enough, people seem to want to know about elections only afterward. It would be better for all involved to get hold of copies of RONR and do your training before an election, so all the contention after the election can be avoided.

So your answer to my question is to invent a time machine.  Very helpful.

[Rob Elsman]

I am still not seeing facts that would lead me to conclude that the rules require another vote.

[Guest Zev]

If the number of extra votes could have affected the outcome, then at the next meeting raise a Point Of Order regarding the validity of the election. If the chairman rules against you then raise an Appeal and have a friend at the ready to second the motion. A majority is needed to overturn the ruling of the chair. If Michael J. Fox is a friend of yours you could forgo the wait and just hop into the Delorean, set the date, hit the gas, get to 84 mph, and be done. 

[Rob Elsman]

Again, I have to wonder whether the time within which a result can be challenged has already expired. If it has (and I'd bet my typing finger on it), then the allegation of irregularities is moot.

[Joshua Katz]

Now that I think about it some more, I'm a little less confident in my previous answer. I think I'd need a better understanding of the signature process - is the consequence of there being more ballots than signatures a danger that there are extra ballots, or that someone voted without signing? If someone voted without signing, I don't think a new election is called for even if the extra votes (which aren't exactly extra, in that case) could have changed the outcome. If the danger is that people voted more than once, or that unauthorized people voted, and the votes could have changed the outcome, then I think one is called for.

[Gary Novosielski]

1 hour ago, Drake Savory said:

Dude seriously.  If there were rules on revoting in the bylaws do you think I'd be asking here on what the rules are?

There's a difference between revoting and recounting. A recount just means counting the same ballots again.  That doesn't seem to be what you're asking about.

I don't think you've made clear exactly what was wrong with the ballots, what are these signatures you speak of, and what your bylaws said was wrong with the situation.  

[Drake Savory]

Voting involves a signature and submitting a ballot.  If a member wishes to abstain then they do not sign.  Some of the people sign then choose to abstain creating undervotes but that is not the issue.  Under the bylaws "Ballots will be counted as valid as long as all signatures meet the membership requirement.  Envelopes with more ballots than signatures for that site will be declared invalid." and this year the vote is so close those votes will make a difference.

The argument is that the Site Representatives did not conduct the election properly

" Site Representatives shall have a list of eligible votes in the unit they represent.  Members shall acknowledge receipt of a ballot by signing their name on the signature list.  The voter shall deposit the marked ballot in a designated ballot envelope.  After voting has been completed, the Site Representative shall submit the ballot envelope and the signature list to the custody of the Election Committee or its designated representative. "

since clearly there cannot be overvotes if this is administered correctly and this election had a overvotes therefore the bylaws were violated.   One reason for this is someone may be a member but not on the list.  They can still vote by submitting a membership form but as many Site Reps have the member sign when they return the ballot a couple end up NOT having the member sign if they also return the membership form (no name to sign next to).

 

My contention is that the forum for this is not the Board but rather the membership (through their representatives) at the monthly meeting to deal with the issue. 

 

Edited April 21, 2019 at 05:09 AM by Drake Savory

[Joshua Katz]

3 minutes ago, Drake Savory said:

My contention is that forum for this is not the Board but rather the membership (through their representatives) to deal with the issue. 

 

I think this depends on what powers the bylaws give the board, but I most likely agree. 

[Drake Savory]

The membership reps has the power in the organization.  The board has been the main power simply because the monthly membership meetings are always (yes always) inquorate.

[Joshua Katz]

Well, that is a problem. How was the election held?

[Drake Savory]

What do you mean?

[Guest Zev]

If most other meetings were inquorate then for me the question is, was this election also inquorate? Because if it was, then the entire election is null and void. What the board wants has nothing to do with it. They can suggest anything they want but this election was conducted by the assembly and the assembly is the one to take any action if they so desire. Also, if the monthly meetings cannot gather a quorum perhaps a bylaws amendment lowering the threshold is advisable.

[Guest Zev]

Oh, and another thing. Have the voter sign the signature list as they deposit their ballot in the urn, not sign the list, get a ballot, walk away and perhaps never return.

[J. J.]

9 hours ago, Drake Savory said:

What do you mean?

Did the voting take place at a meeting? 

[Josh Martin]

13 hours ago, Drake Savory said:

The question is, are there ANY circumstances where a body can have a revote of a balloted election of officers assuming the election followed all rules and if so, can it only be selected votes or would it have to be everybody?

No, there obviously cannot be a revote if no rules whatsoever were violated.

In a revote, all members are eligible to vote.

11 hours ago, Drake Savory said:

My contention is that the forum for this is not the Board but rather the membership (through their representatives) at the monthly meeting to deal with the issue. 

Yes, only the membership may order a revote in an election conducted by the membership, unless your rules provide otherwise.

As to whether there has been a violation of the rules which requires a revote, I will leave that to the society to interpret, since the society appears to have extensive election rules.

[Gary Novosielski]

 

 

 

16 hours ago, Drake Savory said:

The question is, are there ANY circumstances where a body can have a revote of a balloted election of officers assuming the election followed all rules and if so, can it only be selected votes or would it have to be everybody?

 

13 hours ago, Drake Savory said:

The argument is that the Site Representatives did not conduct the election properly

 

 

 

 

2

13 hours ago, Drake Savory said:

since clearly there cannot be overvotes if this is administered correctly and this election had a overvotes therefore the bylaws were violated

Well, it seems to me that the question of what to do if no rules were violated does not have applicability here as, if the rules had been followed, there would be no discrepancy.

I think the membership (not the board) has the power to declare the election (or that portion of it which has questionable results) to be null and void, presuming the results have not yet been announced, and order a re-vote. But I also think that the membership has the power to accept the results in spite of the discrepancy. But it can only do either of these things at a regular or properly called meeting at which a quorum is present, which you say never happens. Are you certain that a meeting announced for this specific purpose would still not secure a quorum?  In other circumstances, the membership could also declare certain specific ballots invalid but, if I understand the situation, there is no reasonable way to tell the allegedly invalid ballots from the valid ones.

The quorum seems to be the sticking point here, and I don't see a way around it.  If the rules in RONR apply, the membership is the final authority on any questions of election validity, but without a proper quorate meeting, decisions can't be made.