Ballot design (# of items) when filling both regular terms and remainder of unexpired term

[Ted Wozniak]

First, let me admit that I know just enough about RONR to be dangerous. On the plus side, I am good at research but that has failed me in this instance.

At heart, my question concerns the # of items required on a ballot when members are electing both "regular" directors for a full term and one or more directors to fill the remainder of an unexpired term. The question arises because our bylaws specify plurality voting for all elective offices. We normally have 3 director vacancies each year and normally have six candidates on the ballot for those 3 vacancies. So the top 3 vote getters win.

Sometimes we also have to fill the remainder of an unexpired term, for example, when a sitting director is elected to an officer position or resigns, and an interim director has been appointed. Such an appointment is only good until the next election, when the vacancies shall be filled by election.

In the past when this has arisen, the ballot was divided into two sections, one with the "regular" nominees for full 3-year terms and another one with the nominee(s) for the remaining 1- or 2-year term(s). In effect two election items. Often (usually?), only one candidate was proposed for this additional unexpired term item. 

Since we have plurality voting, it would be much cleaner if the ballot could simply list all nominees in one slate with the top 3 vote getters being elected to full terms and the 4th (and 5th if necessary) being elected to the remaining unexpired term positions. Is that permissible given the facts as stated above?

One additional factor that complicates matters both for the nominating committee, and possibly for the ballot design, is a new bylaws requirement that the nominating committee "shall propose multiple candidates for each elective position of the Association".

I am unclear if this would prohibit the "single item" format proposed above. If two ballot items are required, then the nominating committee would have to find at least 2 candidates for each unexpired term and that separately from the (normally six) candidates for regular office. So at least six candidates for the regular positions in one ballot item and at least two additional (or possibly the same) candidates in the second ballot item.

What's permissible and what would be the cleanest method to abide by the bylaws?    

[Shmuel Gerber]

On 1/25/2022 at 5:14 PM, Ted Wozniak said:

In the past when this has arisen, the ballot was divided into two sections, one with the "regular" nominees for full 3-year terms and another one with the nominee(s) for the remaining 1- or 2-year term(s). In effect two election items. Often (usually?), only one candidate was proposed for this additional unexpired term item. 

Since we have plurality voting, it would be much cleaner if the ballot could simply list all nominees in one slate with the top 3 vote getters being elected to full terms and the 4th (and 5th if necessary) being elected to the remaining unexpired term positions. Is that permissible given the facts as stated above?

It is permissible, but elections should be conducted according to the previous custom unless the assembly votes to do otherwise.

"Whatever method of collecting the ballots is followed, it—like other details relating to voting—should be fixed by rule or custom in the organization and should not be subject to haphazard variation from occasion to occasion." RONR (12th ed.) 45:29

"In the absence of a rule establishing the method of voting, the rule that is established by custom, if any, is followed, unless the assembly, by adoption of an incidental motion or incidental main motion, agrees to do otherwise." 46:30

"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, ...

"If the multiple positions have varying terms (as may happen when terms are staggered or there is an election to fill the remainder of an unexpired term) and the differing term lengths have not been assigned different sections of the ballot, the longer terms are allocated among those receiving a majority vote in the order in which they obtain greater numbers of votes. If there is a tie, the tied candidates may agree which of them will take a longer term; if they do not agree, the question is put to a vote on the next ballot." 46:33-34

[Ted Wozniak]

Thank you for your response. I'll see about changing the custom.