Not releasing the teller report

[robert jarman]

At a convention held recently, there was an election for several contested positions. A couple vice presidents too but the most contentious one was for president. 

While everyone was getting prepared to vote, someone asked whether the numbers for each candidate would be released, and the chair said no. I immediately objected as that is a violation of RONR 45:40 where it says in no uncertain terms that under no circumstances may the teller´s report be released. I don´t see that wording as allowing a suspension of the rules. The constitution of the association says nothing about this procedure, only that a majority is required for an election (although fails to explain how to achieve that if nobody does get it on any particular ballot). 

The chair consulted with the parliamentarian, and the two of them concluded that if a motion was passed to destroy the ballot, then they would not release them. They also concluded that it would be a suspension of the rules requiring 2/3 to pass, but they also failed to say to everyone else that it was a suspend the rules motion needing 2/3. I happened to be sitting next to the parliamentarian so I heard what they were saying. That motion was moved and seconded, and was passed by 322 votes in favour to 95 against, out of roughly 1200 people at the convention who could vote, however they didn´t release the results of that motion to everyone else either. In fact, on no instance did they release the numbers for and against on any motion in the whole convention even when a tally count was necessary several times and we are entirely dependent on the chair´s judgement on this. I also imagine this kind of suspension could also impact the rights of absentees too who might be interested in the numbers like this, especially given that the rule I referenced dictates how the numbers are to be entered into the minutes too which is often done for the benefit of those absent. 

I don´t know what next. Would this ordinarily be able to give rise to some kind of further appeals in most association to the committee relevant to it? I couldn´t get justice at the convention hall itself for transparency of the numbers. 

[puzzling]

RONR 45:40 states that under no circumstances may this [the tellers report] be omitted [from.the minutes] 

so I am wondering if the question is asked the right way.

if in an election no candidate gets majority support,  a reelection(s) for the same post should be held, till a candidate gets majority supporr.

an organisation is free to adopt bylaws or special rules of order that override RONR  so I think a Rule not to include tellersreports in the minutes is in order.

A motion to exclude one particular tellers report in the minutes therfore seems in order. but I would like hear from others about  this.

 

 

[robert jarman]

They never proposed to adopt a rule to prohibit the release of the votes. All that was proposed was a basic motion to not release the report this particular time. The constitution of the association says they follow RONR to the extent that it doesn´t conflict with the constitution, and the constitution says nothing about releasing or not releasing the report. 

As far as I know, the candidates did get majority support, but this is 100% on faith of the tellers, the chair, and the scrutineers. The convention didn´t get the chance to look at the numbers. 

 

[puzzling]

On 10/26/2022 at 10:14 AM, robert jarman said:

They never proposed to adopt a rule to prohibit the release of the votes. All that was proposed was a basic motion to not release the report this particular time. The constitution of the association says they follow RONR to the extent that it doesn´t conflict with the constitution, and the constitution says nothing about releasing or not releasing the report. 

As far as I know, the candidates did get majority support, but this is 100% on faith of the tellers, the chair, and the scrutineers. The convention didn´t get the chance to look at the numbers. 

 

I misunderstood your main question.

as I understand it now, your main question as I interpretate it.(please let me know if I am wrong again)

is a motion not to mention the detailed outcome of a ballotvote in order?

this is a difficult one, I don't know to be honest.

I don't see it infringing on a member individual right. 

(the vote to adopt this motion would be numerical efficient to elect a candidate) it would only cause the elected officer to wonder how high his support is.

but it is a strange motion, so will wait for other replies

[robert jarman]

Members have the right to accurate records of the organization. This is part of statutory law where I live. As well, knowing this sort of stuff is a strong way to improve transparency, especially given that doing this sort of thing so often often creates rot in associations over time and makes people too scared to say when they think something is wrong. People are afraid to run for election or propose motions if they don´t even know if they were remotely close. It is also a direct violation of the rules of order, which we as members are expecting to be adhered to if our bylaws say they should be adhered to. And what if the results were close, to the point where a recount might be a good idea. A convention should be able to order a recount. 

Fostering a culture of transparency is also extremely important, given that the association also frequently comments on political issues of the day and despises actions it sees as corrupt with the current government, who often don´t release vital numbers and tries to shush things within their own departments. Fostering it also encourages members to participate if they can see at a mere glance that all of our numbers check out. It makes us trustworthy and makes people feel comfortable with us if people are ever to believe our criticism of the government. This isn´t a repressive state, this is supposed to be democracy where we trust in our institutions and trust officials even when we disagree with them, how can you have that kind of trust, unwavering trust that survives gut feelings of doubt, if we don´t even provide transparency 101 with ourselves to those who pay our fees. 

[puzzling]

what kind of organisation are you member of?

if it is something unvoluntary or semi voluntary (like an home owners organisation,  professional body, or organisation where there is only onr local one then probably strict (state) laws apply.)

if it is a voluntary organisation some laws will apply.

accurate records mostly only apply to financial records and minutes. 

RONR is a set of rules to make business meetings efficient,  they are overuled by any  bylaws and any special rules of order the organisation may adopt. RONR don't  have legal standing (and on this forum we don't give legal advice) 

But please give more information ghan we might help you further

[George Mervosh]

If the bylaws require a vote by ballot for the election of officers and the presiding officer refused to provide a count to the assembly, you have a problem.

While it is a long thread I suggest you see the first post in this thread and accept that what is said there is true.  https://robertsrules.forumflash.com/topic/30139-what-constitutes-a-ballot-vote/#comment-174332   I was wrong on this issue prior to understanding that the reading of the count of votes to the assembly is an essential element of a ballot vote.

Edited October 26, 2022 at 01:28 PM by George Mervosh

[robert jarman]

It´s a political party, so the finances do need reporting to the public. 

A different law regulates regular non profit associations, but parties are included too. Members of such a society have the right by law to the bylaws. 

I keep trying to explain. There are no bylaws or constitutions or rules of procedure the party has adopted that state they supercede the RONR in relation to these tellers reports. The RONR are the only rules of order that apply to this and the section I quoted is supposed to stand. 

 

The RONR says under no circumstances is it permissible to not release it. Not by a majority, not by two thirds, not even by unanimous consent does it say this can be averted. A motion to suspend the rules in any case cannot pass by a smaller margin than those protected by it, IE a rule protecting a minority of one third or more cannot be suspended but by at least a two thirds vote, and rules related to absentees also cannot be suspended either. Rules that have their application outside of the parliamentary meeting also cannot be suspended, as per 25:13. Vote tallies are meant to be a record for all members for the future, so that would be applicable after the meeting. Absentees who have a right to the minutes can´t give consent to suspending this kind of rule meant to protect them.

The section I quoted says that the teller report is in the minutes, and in our society this means that they will be reported to a standing committee to govern in between conventions and will be reported at the next convention to, and they are even published to the internet. I cannot possibly see how suspending the rules to prevent the publishing of the vote tallies could be permissible. 

[Josh Martin]

On 10/25/2022 at 4:33 PM, robert jarman said:

At a convention held recently, there was an election for several contested positions. A couple vice presidents too but the most contentious one was for president. 

While everyone was getting prepared to vote, someone asked whether the numbers for each candidate would be released, and the chair said no. I immediately objected as that is a violation of RONR 45:40 where it says in no uncertain terms that under no circumstances may the teller´s report be released. I don´t see that wording as allowing a suspension of the rules. The constitution of the association says nothing about this procedure, only that a majority is required for an election (although fails to explain how to achieve that if nobody does get it on any particular ballot). 

The chair consulted with the parliamentarian, and the two of them concluded that if a motion was passed to destroy the ballot, then they would not release them. They also concluded that it would be a suspension of the rules requiring 2/3 to pass, but they also failed to say to everyone else that it was a suspend the rules motion needing 2/3. I happened to be sitting next to the parliamentarian so I heard what they were saying. That motion was moved and seconded, and was passed by 322 votes in favour to 95 against, out of roughly 1200 people at the convention who could vote, however they didn´t release the results of that motion to everyone else either. In fact, on no instance did they release the numbers for and against on any motion in the whole convention even when a tally count was necessary several times and we are entirely dependent on the chair´s judgement on this. I also imagine this kind of suspension could also impact the rights of absentees too who might be interested in the numbers like this, especially given that the rule I referenced dictates how the numbers are to be entered into the minutes too which is often done for the benefit of those absent. 

I don´t know what next. Would this ordinarily be able to give rise to some kind of further appeals in most association to the committee relevant to it? I couldn´t get justice at the convention hall itself for transparency of the numbers. 

I am in agreement that a motion to Suspend the Rules to omit the reading of the teller's report and to omit such a report from the minutes is not in order.

Notwithstanding this, I don't think there is any further recourse on this matter so far as RONR is concerned, since the convention is the highest body in the organization. So there is no one else to appeal to. And the convention itself has presumably adjourned sine die and will not meet again for a year or more, so there is no practical option of the convention reversing its decision on this matter.

You appear to suggest that this organization is a constituent unit of a larger society. Any questions concerning whether there is a process to appeal to higher levels of the organization or what such an appeal process involves are questions regarding the bylaws of these organizations, not a question regarding RONR.

On 10/26/2022 at 5:23 AM, robert jarman said:

Members have the right to accurate records of the organization. This is part of statutory law where I live.

Questions concerning legal matters should be directed to an attorney.

Edited October 26, 2022 at 06:36 PM by Josh Martin

[robert jarman]

Technically I could ask the national association on this, but it is a very decentralized system. I am going to see what I can do by convincing the new president and secretary in the meantime that this change is a good idea. The convention can govern itself but the chapters of the convention in regional zones where I live are also bound by RONR and they too don´t release these results based on the bylaws of the association. The secretary of the association in general has the right to documentation from these chapters and would have the authority to release them. 

[puzzling]

On 10/26/2022 at 2:27 PM, George Mervosh said:

If the bylaws require a vote by ballot for the election of officers and the presiding officer refused to provide a count to the assembly, you have a problem.

While it is a long thread I suggest you see the first post in this thread and accept that what is said there is true.  https://robertsrules.forumflash.com/topic/30139-what-constitutes-a-ballot-vote/#comment-174332   I was wrong on this issue prior to understanding that the reading of the count of votes to the assembly is an essential element of a ballot vote.

thanks for the reference, sadly it refers to the then last 11th edition and I am not sure if there are changes  in the now valid 12th edition. Also I was puzzling about the committee status of the tellers-group, is the tellers report not a kind of committee report and on that ground has to be included in the announcement. (without announcement it cannot be received, receiving it means it has to be added to the minutes  case closed) 

 

[Josh Martin]

On 10/27/2022 at 3:07 AM, puzzling said:

thanks for the reference, sadly it refers to the then last 11th edition and I am not sure if there are changes  in the now valid 12th edition.

I do not believe that any of the changes in the 12th edition change the rules on this subject.

On 10/27/2022 at 3:07 AM, puzzling said:

Also I was puzzling about the committee status of the tellers-group, is the tellers report not a kind of committee report and on that ground has to be included in the announcement. (without announcement it cannot be received, receiving it means it has to be added to the minutes  case closed) 

The tellers' report is indeed a kind of committee report, but most committee reports are not entered into the minutes. Committee reports are, however, kept on file by the Secretary, and are accessible to members of the society under the same conditions as the minutes.

Edited October 27, 2022 at 11:20 AM by Josh Martin

[Gary Novosielski]

On 10/26/2022 at 7:44 AM, puzzling said:

what kind of organisation are you member of?

if it is something unvoluntary or semi voluntary (like an home owners organisation,  professional body, or organisation where there is only onr local one then probably strict (state) laws apply.)

if it is a voluntary organisation some laws will apply.

accurate records mostly only apply to financial records and minutes. 

RONR is a set of rules to make business meetings efficient,  they are overuled by any  bylaws and any special rules of order the organisation may adopt. RONR don't  have legal standing (and on this forum we don't give legal advice) 

But please give more information ghan we might help you further

I think the language "under no circumstances" is pretty unambiguous. [45:40]