Signed ballot

[rulesasker]

30:1 mentions motions to use a “signed ballot.” But 45:21 says that no action is in order that would force the disclosure of a member’s views. Is a motion for a signed ballot in order?

[Weldon Merritt]

On 5/5/2024 at 2:54 PM, rulesasker said:

Is a motion for a signed ballot in order?

Yes. it is equivalent to a roll call vote, which I suspect you would agree is in order. But I see little or no practical reason for it except in a body that is answerable to a constituency. Even then, I'm not sure why a signed ballot, rather than a roll call vote, would be desired. Unless maybe the assembly wants to go on to other business while they ballots are being counted, rather than suffer the delay of roll call.

[Atul Kapur]

The other rationale for a signed ballot vs a roll call vote is that voters cannot be influenced by knowing how others have voted when they cast their own votes.

[rulesasker]

Ok, my guess is that 45:21 is only when the vote has to be by ballot? So what if the bylaws say that the vote will be by ballot? Can we do it by signed ballot?

The reason people want the ballots signed is to verify they are cast by members. 

[Joshua Katz]

On 5/5/2024 at 1:31 PM, rulesasker said:

The reason people want the ballots signed is to verify they are cast by members. 

If the votes are cast at the meeting, this is easy. If they are cast outside the meeting, RONR prescribes a double-envelope procedure for ensuring ballots are cast by eligible voters while maintaining the secrecy of the vote.

[rulesasker]

On 5/5/2024 at 4:11 PM, Joshua Katz said:

If the votes are cast at the meeting, this is easy.

This is a large organization and nonmembers are usually allowed to attend the meeting, so it is not easy. We have also discussed distributing ballots at the door after checking a roll. 

[Joshua Katz]

On 5/5/2024 at 2:22 PM, rulesasker said:

This is a large organization and nonmembers are usually allowed to attend the meeting, so it is not easy. We have also discussed distributing ballots at the door after checking a roll. 

Most organizations have found it is easier to control the receipt of ballots than their distribution, for what it is worth. That is, to consult a membership list when the person drops off the ballot at the ballot turn in point. Alternatively, if control of distribution or receipt proves difficult, you could also use the two-envelope procedure.

[Rob Elsman]

The rules in RONR (12th ed.) intend that a secret ballot vote be conducted at a polling station where a poll warden checks the identification of the person seeking a ballot against the membership roll before giving the person a ballot.  I think it is understood that the recipient of the ballot is honor-bound not to give his ballot to another person to fill out and cast.  Presumably, such dishonesty would be a punishable offense if the perpetrator were caught..

[rulesasker]

On 5/5/2024 at 4:42 PM, Rob Elsman said:

The rules in RONR (12th ed.) intend that a secret ballot vote be conducted at a polling station where a poll warden checks the identification of the person seeking a ballot against the membership roll before giving the person a ballot.  I think it is understood that the recipient of the ballot is honor-bound not to give his ballot to another person to fill out and cast.  Presumably, such dishonesty would be a punishable offense if the perpetrator were caught..

This seems best, though I couldn’t find anything in the book describing it. For this organization, a membership roll does not exist, but there are criteria for membership. We intend to ask everyone to confirm that they fit the criteria before handing them ballots, so the the honor system is still used, though there would be a larger barrier than passing them out. 
 

But returning to the original question, if people still want to use the signed ballots, is that not allowed since the bylaws say ballots, and 45:21 says ballots must be secret? I think the attractiveness of the signed ballots to some is that it’s simpler to hand out the ballots but we can still go back and resolve an allegation of impropriety after the fact. 

Edited May 5, 2024 at 10:11 PM by rulesasker

[Rob Elsman]

A "polling place" is mentioned in RONR (12th ed.) 46:31(1).  Since, in your situation, members and non-members are admixed in the same meeting room or area, simply having the ushers distribute ballots will not work correctly to prevent non-members from taking a ballot and voting.  There will have to be some way to identify and segregate the two groups before distributing ballots to the members alone.  The polling station is the best means, but this does mean that an official membership roll will have to be maintained by the secretary or one of his assistants, since the poll warden will not otherwise know who fits in which group.

[Atul Kapur]

On 5/5/2024 at 6:08 PM, rulesasker said:

if people still want to use the signed ballots, is that not allowed since the bylaws say ballots, and 45:21 says ballots must be secret?

Correct, signed ballots remove the element of secrecy that is a fundamental aspect of a ballot (so fundamental that many say that the term "secret ballot" is redundant)

[Weldon Merritt]

On 5/5/2024 at 3:30 PM, Atul Kapur said:

The other rationale for a signed ballot vs a roll call vote is that voters cannot be influenced by knowing how others have voted when they cast their own votes.

Good point. I hadn't thought of that aspect.

[Richard Brown]

On 5/5/2024 at 3:30 PM, Atul Kapur said:

The other rationale for a signed ballot vs a roll call vote is that voters cannot be influenced by knowing how others have voted when they cast their own votes.

 

On 5/5/2024 at 8:43 PM, Weldon Merritt said:

Good point. I hadn't thought of that aspect.

Neither had I.  Glad Dr. Kapur made that point.

[Josh Martin]

On 5/5/2024 at 2:54 PM, rulesasker said:

30:1 mentions motions to use a “signed ballot.” But 45:21 says that no action is in order that would force the disclosure of a member’s views. Is a motion for a signed ballot in order?

A "signed ballot," as this term is used in RONR, is not really a ballot vote. It's effectively a roll call vote.

"In a representative body, if there is no legal or constitutional provision specifying the size of the minority that can order a roll-call vote, the body should adopt a rule fixing the size of such a minority—for example, one fifth of those present, as in Congress, or some other portion of those present that is less than a majority. In the absence of such a special rule, a majority vote is required to order the taking of a vote by roll call—in which case a motion to do so is likely to be useless, since its purpose is to force the majority to go on record. In local societies having a large membership but relatively small attendance at meetings, a motion to take a vote by roll call is generally dilatory. It is in order, as one of the Motions Relating to Methods of Voting, however, to move “that a signed ballot be taken by tellers”; and if such a vote is ordered, the voter writes “yes” or “no” on the ballot and signs it. The votes can be recorded in the minutes just as a roll call would be, but the names of all members need not be called. A roll-call vote cannot be ordered in committee of the whole." RONR (12th ed.) 45:46

In any event, a motion for a signed ballot, as this term is used in RONR, is not in order if the organization's bylaws require a ballot vote. Like any roll call vote, it is also not in order in an assembly which is not responsible to an interested constituency.

In other circumstances, however, a motion "that a signed ballot be taken by tellers" is in order. Such a motion requires a majority vote for adoption unless the organization's rules provide otherwise. If an organization wishes to use roll call votes (whether orally or by signed ballot), the organization should likely adopt its own rules permitting a roll call vote to be ordered by some specified minority, since the purpose of a roll call vote is for a minority to force the majority to go on record.

On 5/5/2024 at 3:31 PM, rulesasker said:

Ok, my guess is that 45:21 is only when the vote has to be by ballot?

Yes, I think it is a correct statement that 45:21 is only applicable when the vote is taken by ballot, whether this is because it is required by the organization's rules or a ballot vote has been ordered by the assembly.

On 5/5/2024 at 3:31 PM, rulesasker said:

So what if the bylaws say that the vote will be by ballot? Can we do it by signed ballot?

No.

On 5/5/2024 at 3:31 PM, rulesasker said:

The reason people want the ballots signed is to verify they are cast by members. 

So it would appear that your organization's intent is not to use a "signed ballot" in the sense that term is used in RONR, but it is instead your organization's intent to have a "mostly secret" ballot and use the signature as a security method.

To the extent your organization wishes to do this, this would need to be authorized in your bylaws.

I would highly encourage your organization to first consider security mechanisms that do not undermine the secrecy of the ballot vote.

On 5/5/2024 at 5:08 PM, rulesasker said:

But returning to the original question, if people still want to use the signed ballots, is that not allowed since the bylaws say ballots, and 45:21 says ballots must be secret?

If the bylaws require a ballot vote, then requiring members to sign the ballots is not permissible. If the organization wishes to require that members sign their ballots, the organization would need to add that requirement to the bylaws.

On 5/5/2024 at 5:08 PM, rulesasker said:

I think the attractiveness of the signed ballots to some is that it’s simpler to hand out the ballots but we can still go back and resolve an allegation of impropriety after the fact. 

Well, since many people do not have very legible signatures, I would somewhat question the theory that this will actually enable the society to "go back and resolve an allegation of impropriety after the fact." Further, even to the extent this theory is correct, I would suggest that resolving such issues before the fact will be generally preferable. Overturning the results of the election after it has already occurred will be a great deal messier.

There is also, of course, the fact that this will be undermining the secrecy of the ballot vote, since the persons inspecting the ballots and the signatures will be able to determine how individual members voted.

Of course, if your organization doesn't care about secrecy in its elections, then there's a great many other methods of voting that the society could consider, such as a roll call vote (or signed ballot, which is effectively a written roll call vote). Again, however, if the organization's bylaws presently require a ballot vote, this may only be accomplished by amending the bylaws.

Edited May 6, 2024 at 02:04 PM by Josh Martin

[rulesasker]

On 5/6/2024 at 8:59 AM, Josh Martin said:

Well, since many people do not have very legible signatures, I would somewhat question the theory that this will actually enable the society to "go back and resolve an allegation of impropriety after the fact." Further, even to the extent this theory is correct, I would suggest that resolving such issues before the fact will be generally preferable. Overturning the results of the election after it has already occurred will be a great deal messier.

 

Sorry, should have mentioned that the past practice included a printed name as well. I agree it is better to handle on the front end. Just trying to fully understand what is permissible and what is preferred. Everyone's responses have been very helpful.

[Josh Martin]

On 5/6/2024 at 9:21 AM, rulesasker said:

Sorry, should have mentioned that the past practice included a printed name as well. I agree it is better to handle on the front end. Just trying to fully understand what is permissible and what is preferred. Everyone's responses have been very helpful.

If the organization really has their hearts set on this signature practice, the organization could have voters place the ballots in envelopes, and have the signature and printed name on the envelope. The ballots would then be removed from the envelopes prior to counting. This would enable the signatures to be used as a security measure without compromising the secrecy of the ballot. This method is generally used in voting by mail.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 5/5/2024 at 3:54 PM, rulesasker said:

30:1 mentions motions to use a “signed ballot.” But 45:21 says that no action is in order that would force the disclosure of a member’s views. Is a motion for a signed ballot in order?

If a ballot vote is required by your bylaws, then moving to user a signed ballot would not be in order, as it would force disclosure of individual members' votes.