Ineligible Write-In

[Nadnerb_5600]

We are having our annual election of officers next month. One of the positions has only one candidate on the ballot. Another member of our organization has announced he intends to run for that position as a write-in candidate. The problem is, that person is ineligible for the position as per our by-laws (which is why he was not allowed on the ballot). What would happen if he gets more write-in votes than the person on the ballot? Would he be declared the winner or would votes for him be considered void?

[Rob Elsman]

We are having our annual election of officers next month. One of the positions has only one candidate on the ballot. Another member of our organization has announced he intends to run for that position as a write-in candidate. The problem is, that person is ineligible for the position as per our by-laws (which is why he was not allowed on the ballot). What would happen if he gets more write-in votes than the person on the ballot? Would he be declared the winner or would votes for him be considered void?

I do not understand how he was not allowed on the ballot. Are you saying that the president made a ruling that the person's nomination was out of order on account that he was not qualified for the office in accordance with the bylaws?

[Nadnerb_5600]

I do not understand how he was not allowed on the ballot. Are you saying that the president made a ruling that the person's nomination was out of order on account that he was not qualified for the office in accordance with the bylaws?

The election committee determined that he was not eligible to be on the ballot based on him not meeting the qualifications set forth in our by-laws.

[Rob Elsman]

The election committee determined that he was not eligible to be on the ballot based on him not meeting the qualifications set forth in our by-laws.

What rule gave the election committee that power? Nothing in RONR would empower a committee to do such a thing.

[Nadnerb_5600]

What rule gave the election committee that power? Nothing in RONR would empower a committee to do such a thing.

Our by-laws... They specify that the election committee shall accept the submission of any member's name for the purpose of evaluating their qualifications. It goes on to state that upon completion of their investigation of names submitted, they shal post the names of those eligible to accept nomination. At the November meeting (last week) the committee shall place into nomination all names submited that were found to be qualified. There are no nominations from the floor allowed.

[Gary Novosielski]

We are having our annual election of officers next month. One of the positions has only one candidate on the ballot. Another member of our organization has announced he intends to run for that position as a write-in candidate. The problem is, that person is ineligible for the position as per our by-laws (which is why he was not allowed on the ballot). What would happen if he gets more write-in votes than the person on the ballot? Would he be declared the winner or would votes for him be considered void?

Votes for a candidate who is ineligible to hold the office according to the qualifications in the bylaws are counted as "illegal votes", the same as votes that are not legible, or a vote for Mickey Mouse or other fictional character. Unlike blank ballots (which are ignored as scrap paper), ballots with illegal votes by legal voters are counted for the purpose of determining a majority, i.e., how many votes are required for election.

If there are enough illegal votes to prevent any of the eligible candidates from getting a majority, then the election is incomplete, and a second ballot must be held.

If the tellers while counting the ballolts have doubts on how any of them should be counted, they should notify the chair, who will place the question before the assembly, who will decide how the ballot should be recorded. But if the number of such ballots cannot affect the outcome, they can simply count them as illegal votes.

[Rob Elsman]

Our by-laws... They specify that the election committee shall accept the submission of any member's name for the purpose of evaluating their qualifications. It goes on to state that upon completion of their investigation of names submitted, they shal post the names of those eligible to accept nomination. At the November meeting (last week) the committee shall place into nomination all names submited that were found to be qualified. There are no nominations from the floor allowed.

Thank you for the additional information. Because so much of your question has to do with what your organization's bylaws prescribe rather than what RONR says, I'm going to bow out of this thread with a recommendation that you obtain the services of a parliamentarian in your area with whom you can sit down face-to-face and go over all the relevant bylaws to find out what is the correct answer to your question. Sorry.

[Nadnerb_5600]

Votes for a candidate who is ineligible to hold the office according to the qualifications in the bylaws are counted as "illegal votes", the same as votes that are not legible, or a vote for Mickey Mouse or other fictional character. Unlike blank ballots (which are ignored as scrap paper), ballots with illegal votes by legal voters are counted for the purpose of determining a majority, i.e., how many votes are required for election.

If there are enough illegal votes to prevent any of the eligible candidates from getting a majority, then the election is incomplete, and a second ballot must be held.

Okay... so no matter what, the ineligible "candidate" can not win the election?

[Nadnerb_5600]

Thank you for the additonal information. Because so much of your question has to do with what your organization's bylaws prescribe rather than what RONR says, I'm going to bow out of this thread with a recommendation that you obtain the services of a parliamentarian in your area with whom you can sit down face-to-face and go over all the relevant bylaws to find out what is the correct answer to your question. Sorry.

No problem... thank you!

[Gary Novosielski]

Okay... so no matter what, the ineligible "candidate" can not win the election?

As long as the bylaws are interpreted in such a way that he is ineligible, then he cannot "win".

But bear in mind that the interpretation of the bylaws is up to the assembly. So the phrase "no matter what" is always a dangerous one to use.

[Nadnerb_5600]

As long as the bylaws are interpreted in such a way that he is ineligible, then he cannot "win".

But bear in mind that the interpretation of the bylaws is up to the assembly. So the phrase "no matter what" is always a dangerous one to use.

Understood, thank you. Do you possibly have the page reference that adresses this?

[hmtcastle]

Do you possibly have the page reference that adresses this?

You want a page reference that says that a person who is ineligible to serve in an office is ineligible to serve in that office?

[Nadnerb_5600]

You want a page reference that says that a person who is ineligible to serve in an office is ineligible to serve in that office?

No, the page referencing that write-in votes for an ineligible candidate are considered void votes.

[hmtcastle]

No, the page referencing that write-in votes for an ineligible candidate are considered void votes.

See pp.401-404. Though I don't think you'll find that the vote is "void", just illegal. And, as Mr. Novosielski has noted, illegal votes by legal voters are counted for the purpose of determining a majority, i.e., how many votes are required for election.

[David A Foulkes]

Understood, thank you. Do you possibly have the page reference that adresses this?

Pages 570-573 will offer some principles of bylaw interpretation for you too. Also, Section 1 will offer some great insight into what is a deliberative assembly, what is a member, and the like. Section 2 will offer insight into some parliamentary basics. Sections 3 through 61 will give you a few (thousand) details on this, so put on a pot of coffee before you turn to page 19.

RONR takes a somewhat simple approach to such matters. For example, membership: If a person becomes a member, they immediately have full rights of membership (attend meetings, make motions, debate, vote, and such) at the instant their membership is approved by the society. Sometimes, organizations will include some sort of "probation" period before a member is allowed to vote, for example. That's something that the assembly has to determine how to implement, such as keeping track of when this probation period is up.

Also, there is no restriction in RONR for members to be elected to the Board, or to officer positions. Sometimes, organizations will include a bylaw that says a member cannot hold office until they have been a member for one year. That again is something for the assembly to manage and keep track of. There are so many variations on this theme, it would be impossible for RONR to include any comprehensive citations that cover them all. Thus, it is up to your organization to determine eligibility of candidates to be nominated, elected, or hold office, if you decide to stray from the RONR standard.

[Nadnerb_5600]

Thanks for the replies and the information!

[Kim Goldsworthy]

One of the positions has only one candidate on the ballot.

Another member of our organization has announced he intends to run for that position as a write-in candidate. The problem is, that person is ineligible for the position as per our by-laws (which is why he was not allowed on the ballot).

What would happen if he gets more write-in votes than the person on the ballot? Would he be declared the winner or would votes for him be considered void?

Are you asking a question about Robert's Rules of Order, or asking a question about your bylaws/constitution?

Under Robert's Rules of Order, there are no qualifications for office.

Thus, if no superior rule says otherwise, a write-in vote is perfectly valid, and a write-in candidate can win.

If you have a customized rule involved which has a qualification for office, then the "solution" is to have the organization (not RONR Tenth Edition) interpret the rule and apply the rule.

RONR does say that committees don't do bylaws interpretation.

(Committees are powerless. Committees derive their power from the appointing party or creating party, i.e.,. via a higher authority, or via one's bylaws/constitution.)

[David A Foulkes]

Now, if only there was a forum where members were free to discuss bylaws at length and in depth..... .......... ... \/

[Gary Novosielski]

Also, there is no restriction in RONR for members to be elected to the Board, or to officer positions.

In fact there's no restriction on NON-members being elected.

But they won't be allowed to vote for themselves (or anyone else).

[Tim Wynn]

In fact there's no restriction on NON-members being elected.

Unless you're Mickey Mouse, apparently. It just ain't fair.