Write in Majority

[Guest Larry S]

I am so sorry to bother all of you with this hot mess of an association we have at present. We recently had an election with no nominated candidate. We included a line for any write in votes. There were several write in votes with no one receiving a majority. There was a discussion of whether to re-open a nominating period where "official" candidates would be placed on a ballot. It was approved without the entire Board present nor any sort of advance notice of a meeting. Should we have another election or would the two people who had the most write in votes be the ones who would be the "official" candidates? This is from our constitution:    

In order to be elected as Board Chair, the nominee must receive a majority of the votes cast.  In the event that a majority vote is not achieved, the two nominees with the most number of votes (or more in the case of a tie for the top two positions) will follow this same procedure (Section 5.01(b) through Section 5.01(d)) in a run-off election until a winner is determined.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 2/3/2023 at 9:58 PM, Guest Larry S said:

I am so sorry to bother all of you with this hot mess of an association we have at present. We recently had an election with no nominated candidate. We included a line for any write in votes. There were several write in votes with no one receiving a majority. There was a discussion of whether to re-open a nominating period where "official" candidates would be placed on a ballot. It was approved without the entire Board present nor any sort of advance notice of a meeting. Should we have another election or would the two people who had the most write in votes be the ones who would be the "official" candidates? This is from our constitution:    

In order to be elected as Board Chair, the nominee must receive a majority of the votes cast.  In the event that a majority vote is not achieved, the two nominees with the most number of votes (or more in the case of a tie for the top two positions) will follow this same procedure (Section 5.01(b) through Section 5.01(d)) in a run-off election until a winner is determined.

Apparently this is an election for officers of the association and the entire membership is voting.  According to RONR you can certainly re-open nominations, by majority vote.  I don't know what you meant by "without the entire Board present" since at general membership meeting the board is not in session, because the meeting is not a board meeting, so the board can't technically be "present" although individual board members can be, presuming they are also general members.

Your bylaws contain rules that conflict with RONR, and therefore what RONR says does not matter; you must use the rules in your bylaws.

From what you've quoted, a run-off election is apparently mandatory.  I have no idea what §5.01 of your bylaws says, but you need to follow that.

[Guest Write in Majority]

Let me try again Gary. Opening up nominations was not at a general meeting. It was decided by 4 members of the Board with private phone calls--NOT a conference call. 2 members were not contacted at all. To me, this was not any sort of scheduled board meeting, so no business should have been conducted. Back to the original question which would be: Would there be a run off only between the two people who received the most write in votes? Are the folks who received write in votes considered to be the new candidates for this office?

[Richard Brown]

Was this election taking place at a board meeting or at a general membership meeting? If it was the general membership meeting, Mr. Novosielski has answered your question and I don’t know that I can improve upon it. Other than that, I can only say what one of our moderators seems to think is the appropriate answer when bylaws are involved and that is to say “it’s your rule, you tell us“.  I don’t think that answer is particularly helpful to you, but it seems that is the answer we should be giving.  

My own position is that Mr. Novosielski has already properly answered your question.
 

[Gary Novosielski]

Ultimately, only your own membership can interpret your bylaws.  And since you have customized rules, a full reading of your bylaws would be necessary to interpret those rules in context.

It's pretty clear that four guys shooting the breeze in a barn somewhere does not constitute a meeting, and nothing they "decide" makes any difference.

RONR does not have "run-offs".  Where the rules in RONR apply, if a given ballot does not elect anyone, additional ballots are conducted until one of them does.  No candidates are dropped (unless they withdraw) and new candidates may be added between ballots.  Once the votes are cast there is no distinction between "official" (i.e., nominated) candidates, and write-ins.  One vote is the same as another.  

So if all you have are write-in votes, and your rules require a run-off, then it would appear that a run-off you must have

[Josh Martin]

On 2/3/2023 at 8:58 PM, Guest Larry S said:

I am so sorry to bother all of you with this hot mess of an association we have at present. We recently had an election with no nominated candidate. We included a line for any write in votes. There were several write in votes with no one receiving a majority. There was a discussion of whether to re-open a nominating period where "official" candidates would be placed on a ballot. It was approved without the entire Board present nor any sort of advance notice of a meeting. Should we have another election or would the two people who had the most write in votes be the ones who would be the "official" candidates? This is from our constitution:    

In order to be elected as Board Chair, the nominee must receive a majority of the votes cast.  In the event that a majority vote is not achieved, the two nominees with the most number of votes (or more in the case of a tie for the top two positions) will follow this same procedure (Section 5.01(b) through Section 5.01(d)) in a run-off election until a winner is determined.

This is an interesting question that the society ultimately will need to resolve for itself. The society clearly did not contemplate this situation when it wrote its rules.

So far as the rules in RONR are concerned, the next step when no person obtains a majority would be to hold another round of voting. This is not a "run-off" and votes are not limited to the persons who received the most votes in the previous round. The society may, if it wishes, reopen nominations prior to holding another round of voting.

Your organization, however, has a rule that "In the event that a majority vote is not achieved, the two nominees with the most number of votes (or more in the case of a tie for the top two positions) will follow this same procedure (Section 5.01(b) through Section 5.01(d)) in a run-off election until a winner is determined."

The use of the word "nominees" is unfortunate because, strictly speaking, there were no nominees in the situation in question. I am personally inclined to think (unless there are other rules on this matter I am not aware of) that the most logical interpretation of this rule is that it applies to the two persons who received the most votes, whether those persons were nominees or not. But it will ultimately be up to the organization to interpret its own rules.

In the long run, it would be advisable to amend this rule for clarity.

On 2/4/2023 at 9:31 AM, Guest Write in Majority said:

Let me try again Gary. Opening up nominations was not at a general meeting. It was decided by 4 members of the Board with private phone calls--NOT a conference call. 2 members were not contacted at all. To me, this was not any sort of scheduled board meeting, so no business should have been conducted.

Regardless of how the rule is interpreted, I think there is no doubt that this action was not proper.

On 2/4/2023 at 9:31 AM, Guest Write in Majority said:

Would there be a run off only between the two people who received the most write in votes? Are the folks who received write in votes considered to be the new candidates for this office?

I think that is the most reasonable interpretation of the rule, although it will ultimately be up to the organization to interpret its own rules. In the long run, it would be desirable to amend the rules for clarity.

Edited February 5, 2023 at 11:43 AM by Josh Martin

[puzzling]

In a run-off  between two candidates (and no write ins) there can only be a tie between them or a majority for one of the candidates.

But before giving more comments what is the text of section 5.01?

[Gary Novosielski]

On 2/5/2023 at 5:21 AM, puzzling said:

In a run-off  between two candidates (and no write ins) there can only be a tie between them or a majority for one of the candidates.

That's true only if there were no illegal votes cast.  If there were, it is possible for neither of the two leading candidates to achieve a majority, even though not tied.