who can order a revote after an election of officers is announced

[Guest rainer]

 

 

[Chris Harrison]

38 minutes ago, Guest rainer said:

who can order a revote after an election of officers is announced

That depends on the circumstances.  Can you please provide more details such as for what reason do you believe a re-vote is warranted? 

[Transpower]

If this were a voice vote and you doubt the result, you (or anyone at the meeting) could yell out "Division!"--this is a "Division of the Assembly) ((RONR, 11th ed.), p. 52, ll. 9-35).  This requires a standing vote.

[Rob Elsman]

Oddly enough, the original post seems to have disappeared. That's too bad. A lot of readers on the forum might have liked to learn something from it.

As to the answer, strictly speaking, any member can do what members can do when they can do it.

[Gary Novosielski]

Was there ever an actual post?  It appears the entire question was asked in the title.

In any case, all questions arising out of an election are the purview of the assembly holding the election.

[Rob Elsman]

Maybe that's why we don't quite know what to do with it. 😀

[Guest rainer]

Here is what happened there was a vote for  a position  on the board. Two members were nominated for the position written votes were cast  by the assembly but there was no 

announcement made that the polls were closed. The  vote counters then proceeded to count the vote which ended up in a tie. there were five counters

and the head of the counters asked the counters if they had all had voted and  two counters had not voted wanted to vote at this point.

. That changed the vote to 23 to 21 and that result was announced to the assembly. The assembly then adjourned . Two days later

the winner of the election was informed that the results of the election were not valid and there will be a new vote at the next meeting for that position.

Should the original results stand or should there be a re-vote.  As a side note all the elections over the years have been done in this fashion without  closing

the polls and have been accepted as valid results.

[Chris Harrison]

When the "vote" is to take place at the next meeting a Point of Order should be raised that the original vote was valid and if there was a question about how the vote was conducted it needed to be raised at that point (RONR pp. 250-251).  That being said, in the future the members should take a look at RONR pp. 408-409 regarding when and how a member can change their vote/decide to vote.

[Josh Martin]

12 hours ago, Guest rainer said:

Here is what happened there was a vote for  a position  on the board. Two members were nominated for the position written votes were cast  by the assembly but there was no 

announcement made that the polls were closed. The  vote counters then proceeded to count the vote which ended up in a tie. there were five counters

and the head of the counters asked the counters if they had all had voted and  two counters had not voted wanted to vote at this point.

. That changed the vote to 23 to 21 and that result was announced to the assembly. The assembly then adjourned . Two days later

the winner of the election was informed that the results of the election were not valid and there will be a new vote at the next meeting for that position.

Should the original results stand or should there be a re-vote.  As a side note all the elections over the years have been done in this fashion without  closing

the polls and have been accepted as valid results.

RONR notes the following regarding closing the polls: “Motions relating to opening and closing the polls are applicable only with respect to ballot votes. It is usually better to leave it to the chair to close the polls. When the vote is taken by ballot, as soon as the chair thinks that all have voted who wish to, he inquires if all have voted. If there is no response, he declares the polls closed, and the tellers proceed to count the vote.” (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 286)

It seems to me that if the tellers have begun to count the vote, the polls are closed, notwithstanding the lack of a formal announcement to this effect. Only the assembly (not the tellers) may reopen the polls. (And even if the polls are reopened, they are reopened for all members of the assembly who have not yet voted, not just for members of the tellers’ committee.) Therefore, it seems to me that a Point of Order can and should be raised that the two votes cast by the tellers are invalid, followed by an Appeal if necessary. If it is ultimately determined that these two votes are invalid, no candidate would have a majority and a second round of voting would be necessary.

Importantly, however, this decision can only be made at a meeting of the assembly. Whoever informed the candidate that the election was invalid and must be redone jumped the gun a bit, as no such decision has yet been made.

In the future, I suppose the chair should formally declare the polls closed, and the tellers from this election should not be appointed as tellers again.

11 hours ago, Chris Harrison said:

When the "vote" is to take place at the next meeting a Point of Order should be raised that the original vote was valid and if there was a question about how the vote was conducted it needed to be raised at that point (RONR pp. 250-251).  That being said, in the future the members should take a look at RONR pp. 408-409 regarding when and how a member can change their vote/decide to vote.

As I understand the facts, the tellers’ committee took it upon themselves to reopen the polls, for themselves only, after already counting the votes. Although there was no formal announcement of closing the polls, it seems to me that it is understood that the polls are closed after counting has begun (let alone after it is completed). Any votes case after the polls are votes cast by persons who, at that time, are not eligible to vote. Since there were enough such votes to affect the result, there is a continuing breach.