Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Home on the range


hmtcastle

Recommended Posts

Here's an actual excerpt from actual bylaws:

4.1. Number of Trustees. There shall be at least 5 but not more than twenty-five Trustees, collectively known as the Board of Trustees ("the Board").

And let's assume that, traditionally, the number of trustees has hovered around six. Or nine.

Is there anything in RONR that, at the annual meeting, would prevent one member from voting for himself and, by a vote of 1-0, elect himself to the 7th, or 10th, or 25th seat on the board?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an actual excerpt from actual bylaws:

4.1. Number of Trustees. There shall be at least 5 but not more than twenty-five Trustees, collectively known as the Board of Trustees ("the Board").

And let's assume that, traditionally, the number of trustees has hovered around six. Or nine.

Is there anything in RONR that, at the annual meeting, would prevent one member from voting for himself and, by a vote of 1-0, elect himself to the 7th, or 10th, or 25th seat on the board?

In the unlikely event that 1 is a majority of ballots cast for the position of Trustee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an actual excerpt from actual bylaws:

4.1. Number of Trustees. There shall be at least 5 but not more than twenty-five Trustees, collectively known as the Board of Trustees ("the Board").

And let's assume that, traditionally, the number of trustees has hovered around six. Or nine.

Is there anything in RONR that, at the annual meeting, would prevent one member from voting for himself and, by a vote of 1-0, elect himself to the 7th, or 10th, or 25th seat on the board?

What do the Bylaws say about election procedures, etc. for such position(s)? Wouldn't the bylaws state how the actual number of trustees is determined, as well as who makes such a determination?

Personally, I much prefer a bylaws defined number of officers, directors, etc. Then, you know if there is a vacancy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there anything in RONR that, at the annual meeting, would prevent one member from voting for himself and, by a vote of 1-0, elect himself to the 7th, or 10th, or 25th seat on the board?

No. RONR has no restriction implying, "You cannot vote for yourself."

I am assuming that every candidate is a separate "question" in the parliamentary sense.

(For example, the ballot might list 25 names, and the instructions might say, "Vote for no more than 25 candidates".)

However ...

A vote total of 1-0 might be problematic in another scenario.

If there is one set of identical seats (one popular example is "N directors", with no difference in terms nor any other feature), then 1-0 won't likely be enough, since one would need a MAJORITY, not a PLURALITY, to be elected.

(For example, if you were voting for "Members of the Xmas Party Committee", then only those candidates who get a majority vote votes cast will be elected, and a person who gets 1 vote (where there are more than one ballot cast) won't get on the committee.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's actually a very likely event if no one else has voted for the 25th seat on the board.

All the ballots with the office of "Trustee" on them are counted together. They are identical offices, so everyone is deemed to have cast, at most, one ballot for ''Trustee(s)'. A majority of that number is required for any trustee, from slot #1 through slot #25, to be elected. In fact there are no slot numbers.

It depends how many people get a majority. That's how many are elected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the ballots with the office of "Trustee" on them are counted together. They are identical offices, so everyone is deemed to have cast, at most, one ballot for ''Trustee(s)'. A majority of that number is required for any trustee, from slot #1 through slot #25, to be elected. In fact there are no slot numbers.

It depends how many people get a majority. That's how many are elected.

Final answer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an actual excerpt from actual bylaws:

4.1. Number of Trustees. There shall be at least 5 but not more than twenty-five Trustees, collectively known as the Board of Trustees ("the Board").

And let's assume that, traditionally, the number of trustees has hovered around six. Or nine.

Is there anything in RONR that, at the annual meeting, would prevent one member from voting for himself and, by a vote of 1-0, elect himself to the 7th, or 10th, or 25th seat on the board?

An organization that has a bylaw like this must adopt the special rules of order that are needed to regulate it, since the rules in RONR presume that the number of open seats is known before the nomination/election procedure begins. This is necessary, since each voter may cast as many votes as there are seats open. If the number of seats open is not known, it is not possible to say how many votes each voter may cast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An organization that has a bylaw like this must adopt the special rules of order that are needed to regulate it, since the rules in RONR presume that the number of open seats is known before the nomination/election procedure begins. This is necessary, since each voter may cast as many votes as there are seats open. If the number of seats open is not known, it is not possible to say how many votes each voter may cast.

Well if that's the entirety of the language (which I doubt), then it looks like there are 25 seats open at any given time. If there is some other algorithm that is setting the "current size" of the board, we're not privy to that, so I'm assuming there's not.

So, if all seats are elected each year, anyone can vote for up to 25 names (this presumes there are no seats for which this is an "off" year). Up to 25 of the most favored candidates with a majority will fill the seats. If as many as 5 seats are thus filled, the election is complete. If fewer than 5 achieve a majority, a second and subsequent ballots may be required.

That's about as close to RONR as I can hammer this clause without breaking it.:)

It is apparent that, if left alone with paper and pencil for sufficient time, humans ultimately cannot resist writing nutzy bylaws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would also depend on how many votes each person is casting. Generally speaking, a member has one vote per position: thus a minimum of five votes (five trustees being the minimum) and a maximum of twenty-five (twenty-five being the maximum number of trustees.) Thus a 1-0 is unlikely to elect a person, however if there are only twenty four other people who are elected to office, then the 1-0 vote could potentially elect the person as the person has received a majority of votes for one position.

Of course, it would be better to re-write the By-law in order to fix the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would also depend on how many votes each person is casting. Generally speaking, a member has one vote per position: thus a minimum of five votes (five trustees being the minimum) and a maximum of twenty-five (twenty-five being the maximum number of trustees.)

Actually the minimum votes a person can cast is one, and still have their ballot counted as a Trustee(s) ballot. You can't force a person to cast five votes.

Thus a 1-0 is unlikely to elect a person, however if there are only twenty four other people who are elected to office, then the 1-0 vote could potentially elect the person as the person has received a majority of votes for one position.

I don't see how the 1-0 vote can elect anyone, unless only one person votes for that one trustee, and nobody else votes at all. Remember, this is not an election for Trustee #1, and another election for Trustee #2, and so on. It is a group election for 25 identical seats. Nobody is running specifically for the Trustee #17 slot, for example. They're all just running for Trustee.

So, if there are, say, 30 people present, and they all cast ballots for at least one name (though really any of them could vote for up to 25), then it will take a majority of the 30, or 16 votes, to elect a person as a Trustee.

How does a person with 1 vote get elected? That's easy. He does not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there anything in RONR that, at the annual meeting, would prevent one member from voting for himself and, by a vote of 1-0, elect himself to the 7th, or 10th, or 25th seat on the board?

The answer to this question basically comes down to how the range is interpreted - should the assembly continue until at least the minimum is satisfied, or continue until the maximum is satisfied (or they run out of candidates)? If the former, then it is quite unlikely that a member voting for himself could be elected. If the latter, it is quite likely he could be (although probably not on the first few ballots). RONR does not directly address how this should be handled, and this is something the society would have to interpret for itself.

Of course, the sensible thing for the organization to do would be to adopt rules specifying that the board's size shall be set by resolution prior to the election. Or better yet, just stick with a fixed board size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, the sensible thing for the organization to do would be to adopt rules specifying that the board's size shall be set by resolution prior to the election. Or better yet, just stick with a fixed board size.

Thanks to all for the replies. That's an actual excerpt from the actual bylaws of an actual organization whose annual meeting will be on December 11, for which the required thirty-day notice will, I trust, be mailed no later than tomorrow.

Though there have traditionally been nine board members (serving staggered three-year terms), there are currently only six. Given the range provided for in the bylaws, the death of a board member earlier in the year did not, at least in the minds of the board members, create a vacancy. Or, at least, not a vacancy that had to be filled.

Incumbents are traditionally re-elected with no opposition (as are the selections of the nominating committee in the case of retiring board members).

Let's suppose that the board is happy with only six members (I suspect they'd be even happier with five) and so there will be only two nominees presented at the annual meeting. And let's suppose everyone writes those names (or checks those boxes) on their ballots. But I write in my own name.

Did I just elect myself as the seventh member of the board?

It seems to me that the board can't have it both ways. That is, they can't let elected positions go unfilled if there's a mid-term vacancy and then turn around and prevent "adding" another member to the board. Or can they? (And, of course, I realize that it's not the board that's doing this but merely the general membership acquiescing to the board's decisions.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's suppose that the board is happy with only six members (I suspect they'd be even happier with five) and so there will be only two nominees presented at the annual meeting. And let's suppose everyone writes those names (or checks those boxes) on their ballots. But I write in my own name.

No, of course not (unless you are the only member casting a ballot).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's suppose that the board is happy with only six members (I suspect they'd be even happier with five) and so there will be only two nominees presented at the annual meeting. And let's suppose everyone writes those names (or checks those boxes) on their ballots. But I write in my own name.

Did I just elect myself as the seventh member of the board?

Not unless you're the only one voting. How many other people are voting in this Trustee election? Explain how one vote is a majority of that number.

In order to be elected, your name needs to be on a majority of the ballots cast for Trustee. By your description, that can't happen if anyone besides you is voting in this election. One vote is not a majority of two nor of anything greater than two.

You are not elected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna impose on your patience and give this one last stab.

How can one vote for (and elect) a seventh member of the board if the ballot implies that there will only be six members but the bylaws permit up to twenty-five members?

The bylaws should prescribe the exact number of trustees, but if the exact number isn't pinned down, I'd say each voter can cast twenty-five votes for trustee. Anyone who casts fewer is simply abstaining. Just get enough people to vote for a person (or persons) and the board should grow.

(By the way, I'll vote for you.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bylaws should prescribe the exact number of trustees

Though, on this forum, I think we've all seen bylaws that provide for a range of board members.

Just get enough people to vote for a person (or persons) and the board should grow.

But how many people is enough people? I have the uncomfortable feeling that I'm failing to grasp a simple math problem. If thirty people vote and thirty people vote for John Doe and thirty people vote for Jane Roe and one of those thirty persons also votes for me (i.e. votes for three candidates), didn't I receive a majority of the votes for the third seat?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though, on this forum, I think we've all seen bylaws that provide for a range of board members.

But how many people is enough people? I have the uncomfortable feeling that I'm failing to grasp a simple math problem. If thirty people vote and thirty people vote for John Doe and thirty people vote for Jane Roe and one of those thirty persons also votes for me (i.e. votes for three candidates), didn't I receive a majority of the votes for the third seat?

No. The answer is on p. 427, l. 6-11. Every ballot with a vote cast for a trustee is counted as one vote cast. If thirty ballots are turned in, each candidate needs 16 votes to be elected. The thirty ballots give you the base for determining the result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though, on this forum, I think we've all seen bylaws that provide for a range of board members.

But how many people is enough people? I have the uncomfortable feeling that I'm failing to grasp a simple math problem. If thirty people vote and thirty people vote for John Doe and thirty people vote for Jane Roe and one of those thirty persons also votes for me (i.e. votes for three candidates), didn't I receive a majority of the votes for the third seat?

No.

If thirty people cast a ballot for Trustee, containing anywhere from one to twenty-five names, then the votes required for election to ANY seat is sixteen--a majority of the 30 ballots cast.

There is no vote "for the third seat". There is a ballot with names on it. The order of the names makes no difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Way back when, you indicated that "there have traditionally been nine board members (serving staggered three-year terms)"

I would suggest that you try to determine how this came about. It may well be that at some point in time a rule was adopted covering this. I haven't read your bylaws, but my assumption would be that it is your general membership, and not your board, that has the authority to make this decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna impose on your patience and give this one last stab.

How can one vote for (and elect) a seventh member of the board if the ballot implies that there will only be six members but the bylaws permit up to twenty-five members?

Get some additional nominations just before the vote, or, better yet (element of surprise) organize a write-in campaign? It seems that if one or more 'extra' members actually get a majority vote in the election, the people who think that only six are supposed to be elected won't have a parliamentary leg to stand on (failing a written rule somewhere in the records of the organization, as posited by Mr. Honemann).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...