Tie Vote - Board Vacancy

[Guest Mitch]

Hi

We are a small Board (under 12) for a community non-profit. During recent elections at the AGM, one Board position became vacant. Per our By-laws, the vacancy is filled by a majority vote of the remaining Board members. We have since learned the President and the Past President, as at the time of the AGM, were aware of one person who had come forward to present themselves as a candidate for the position, however they did not inform the remaining Board members. They also prevented a discussion at the AGM on the vacancy, leaving the other Board members to think no one had applied.

2 Months pass and there is no communication. Then the Board members receive an email indicating we have two candidates. The one who had applied back at the AGM and a new person who had just submitted their intentions. There was still no explanation for their actions at the AGM when a candidate was present. The undue delay in resolving this vacancy, the questionable actions at the AGM and the withholding of pertinent information is upsetting to many Board members but there does not seem to be anything in the ByLaws covering this topic, short of full disciplinary action.

Finally a vote takes place and the result is a tie which will not likely change by re-voting. The Chair did vote and our Bylaws are silent w.r.t a tie breaking vote.

Please advise on ideas on how to resolve so that we can go forward.

 

[Atul Kapur]

You keep voting until there is a winner. You could re-open nominations. You could take disciplinary action against those who you feel acted improperly - if their voting rights are suspended or they are removed, then you may not have a tie on the next round of voting.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 6/5/2023 at 11:49 AM, Guest Mitch said:

Hi

We are a small Board (under 12) for a community non-profit. During recent elections at the AGM, one Board position became vacant. Per our By-laws, the vacancy is filled by a majority vote of the remaining Board members. We have since learned the President and the Past President, as at the time of the AGM, were aware of one person who had come forward to present themselves as a candidate for the position, however they did not inform the remaining Board members. They also prevented a discussion at the AGM on the vacancy, leaving the other Board members to think no one had applied.

2 Months pass and there is no communication. Then the Board members receive an email indicating we have two candidates. The one who had applied back at the AGM and a new person who had just submitted their intentions. There was still no explanation for their actions at the AGM when a candidate was present. The undue delay in resolving this vacancy, the questionable actions at the AGM and the withholding of pertinent information is upsetting to many Board members but there does not seem to be anything in the ByLaws covering this topic, short of full disciplinary action.

Finally a vote takes place and the result is a tie which will not likely change by re-voting. The Chair did vote and our Bylaws are silent w.r.t a tie breaking vote.

Please advise on ideas on how to resolve so that we can go forward.

 

A tie is less than a majority, and therefore you hold a second ballot (and if necessary subsequent ballots) until the results indicate a majority for one candidate. Neither the Chair nor anyone else gets two votes. The results, though unlikely to change, will change eventually. You may recall that the recent election for Speaker of the House of Representatives, took fifteen ballots.  The record is probably in the hundreds.  You always have the option of reopening nominations.

However, I'm confused on one point.  If the original ballot at the AGM did not result in the election of all the necessary officers, this is not a mid-term vacancy to be filled by the board, this is an incomplete election by the membership, and it is there, and not in a Board meeting, that the second and subsequent ballots should have been, and still should be, held.