election candidate withdrawal from tie vote

[Guest JGA]

A private organization held elections there was a tie vote. Candidate 2 stated on the record he withdraw his name from the tie vote leaving the votes abandon. The Bylaws stipulate there shall be a subsequent second vote to break a tie vote. Is a second vote required or is it a moot issue because Candidate 2 withdraw their name from the tie. Is there a difference between withdrawing their name from the tie and withdrawing their name from the ballot. There were just two candidates on the ballot. Is candidate 1 the winner by default?

Thank you

[Gary Novosielski]

A private organization held elections there was a tie vote. Candidate 2 stated on the record he withdraw his name from the tie vote leaving the votes abandon. The Bylaws stipulate there shall be a subsequent second vote to break a tie vote. Is a second vote required or is it a moot issue because Candidate 2 withdraw their name from the tie. Is there a difference between withdrawing their name from the tie and withdrawing their name from the ballot. There were just two candidates on the ballot. Is candidate 1 the winner by default?

Thank you

If there was a tie vote then neither candidate got a majority, and you need a second ballot.

[Trina]

A private organization held elections there was a tie vote. Candidate 2 stated on the record he withdraw his name from the tie vote leaving the votes abandon. The Bylaws stipulate there shall be a subsequent second vote to break a tie vote. Is a second vote required or is it a moot issue because Candidate 2 withdraw their name from the tie. Is there a difference between withdrawing their name from the tie and withdrawing their name from the ballot. There were just two candidates on the ballot. Is candidate 1 the winner by default?

Thank you

As Mr. Novosielski points out, RONR would require an additional round (or rounds) of voting anyway, if no candidate achieved a majority -- the bylaws provision appears to be redundant, at least in this particular circumstance.

At the moment (assuming the meeting at which the election was held has been adjourned by now) you have an incomplete election, which will need to be completed at a future meeting. It's the fact that the vote was a tie that put you in this spot, not the fact that one candidate withdrew after the vote was counted. As far as the idea suggested by the phrase "leaving the votes abandon[ed]," the candidate doesn't have any power to make the votes cast for him 'not count' in some way.

Do your bylaws require vote by ballot for any/all elections? In that case you would have to vote again by ballot, even with only a single candidate. If the bylaws do not require ballot voting when there is a single candidate, or if they are silent on the form of the vote in an election, a single candidate can be declared elected by acclamation (assuming no one else is nominated from the floor, of course). (See RONR p. 428 ll. 32-35)

In any case, the remaining candidate is not the winner 'by default' -- the organization has to jump through a few more hoops first to properly complete the election process.

[Tim Wynn]

A private organization held elections there was a tie vote.

Then you vote again, until someone receives a majority of the votes cast.

Candidate 2 stated on the record he withdraw his name from the tie vote leaving the votes abandon.

I can't imagine what you mean by "on the record," and the votes are not abandoned; they still count for him.

The Bylaws stipulate there shall be a subsequent second vote to break a tie vote. Is a second vote required or is it a moot issue because Candidate 2 withdraw their name from the tie.

It's required because 1) your bylaws apparently say so, and 2) because no one received a majority of the votes cast. The candidates can't change the votes.

Is there a difference between withdrawing their name from the tie and withdrawing their name from the ballot.

He's just withdrawing, and when he does so, his name should be removed from the subsequent ballot. He can't "withdraw from the tie."

There were just two candidates on the ballot. Is candidate 1 the winner by default?

No. You vote again, just like it says in your bylaws. Voters are free to write in alternate names, as well.

Thank you

[Tim Wynn]

If the bylaws do not require ballot voting when there is a single candidate, or if they are silent on the form of the vote in an election, a single candidate can be declared elected by acclamation (assuming no one else is nominated from the floor, of course). (See RONR p. 428 ll. 32-35)

The Bylaws stipulate there shall be a subsequent second vote to break a tie vote.

Whatever the bylaws wants, the bylaws gets. It looks like a "subsequent second vote" is required.

[Trina]

Whatever the bylaws wants, the bylaws gets. It looks like a "subsequent second vote" is required.

Yes, but time and circumstance appear to have moved on from the resolution of the tie vote (at least as such a resolution was probably envisioned by the writers of the bylaws). Are you suggesting that both candidates, including the guy who wants to withdraw his name, MUST stay on the ballot at this point in order to satisfy the bylaws? That is certainly a possible interpretation.

Might this not be a matter of bylaws interpretation for the organization?

[Dan Honemann]

The Bylaws stipulate there shall be a subsequent second vote to break a tie vote.

Do your bylaws require vote by ballot for any/all elections? In that case you would have to vote again by ballot, even with only a single candidate. If the bylaws do not require ballot voting when there is a single candidate, or if they are silent on the form of the vote in an election, a single candidate can be declared elected by acclamation (assuming no one else is nominated from the floor, of course). (See RONR p. 428 ll. 32-35)

Whatever the bylaws wants, the bylaws gets. It looks like a "subsequent second vote" is required.

Yes, the bylaws require a "subsequent second vote", but we don't yet know if they require that the voting be by ballot.

However, even if they do not, I think that since the first vote taken in this election was a ballot vote, continued voting by ballot is required in completing the election.

[Tim Wynn]

Are you suggesting that both candidates, including the guy who wants to withdraw his name, MUST stay on the ballot at this point in order to satisfy the bylaws?

No, it seems that the bylaws call for a "subsequent second vote," and I don't think "acclamation" satisfies that.

Might this not be a matter of bylaws interpretation for the organization?

Absolutely.

[Gary Novosielski]

Yes, but time and circumstance appear to have moved on from the resolution of the tie vote (at least as such a resolution was probably envisioned by the writers of the bylaws). Are you suggesting that both candidates, including the guy who wants to withdraw his name, MUST stay on the ballot at this point in order to satisfy the bylaws? That is certainly a possible interpretation.

Might this not be a matter of bylaws interpretation for the organization?

RONR does specify (somewhere--I'm bookless at the moment) that no names are dropped except for those who withdraw, so I think this guy gets to have his name dropped. Arguably this would be only with the consent of the assembly, but why would they not, given that he will doubtless decline the office if elected?

[Tim Wynn]

RONR does specify (somewhere--I'm bookless at the moment)

The sign of a great parliamentarian.

[Gary Novosielski]

The sign of a great parliamentarian.

I am not a great parliamentarian. But I play one on the Intertubez

[Tim Wynn]

I am not a great parliamentarian. But I play one on the Intertubez

You have us fooled.

[Guest Kebu]

Board ballot contains eight nominees, three open seats, paper ballot taken by mail, all candidates get some votes, but then two candidates want to withdraw, what is the procedure at the meeting? If there is no clear majority of paper ballots of those remaining, vote again using proxies as available plus physical attendance only? Vote all candidates again? What if one candidate had a majority without the pullout? Elected and vote a run off for the other two following the two candidate withdrawal? Thanks.

[hmtcastle]

Board ballot contains eight nominees, three open seats, paper ballot taken by mail, all candidates get some votes, but then two candidates want to withdraw, what is the procedure at the meeting? If there is no clear majority of paper ballots of those remaining, vote again using proxies as available plus physical attendance only? Vote all candidates again? What if one candidate had a majority without the pullout? Elected and vote a run off for the other two following the two candidate withdrawal? Thanks.

Vote again.

No Proxies.

No pullout.

One question.

At a time.

New Question.

New Topic.

Thanks.

[David A Foulkes]

I love the poetic stylings of Mr. M's reply. Just sayin'......

What if one candidate had a majority without the pullout? Elected and vote a run off for the other two following the two candidate withdrawal?

Well, if one of the candidates received a majority of votes, you've filled one of the three seats. You'll need another election now to fill the other two.

RONR states "The nominee receiving the lowest number of votes is never removed from the next ballot unless the bylaws so require, or unless he withdraws..." (p. 426 l. 35ff) While this citation explicitly mentions the (one) candidate with the fewest votes, it could be inferred to apply to any candidate who wishes to withdraw. Taken that way, you would have the five remaining candidates on the ballot for the remaining two seats.

I'm going to stay away from the whole mail-ballot-proxy issues, so please don't read anything into my reply as regards those.

[Gary Novosielski]

Board ballot contains eight nominees, three open seats, paper ballot taken by mail, all candidates get some votes, but then two candidates want to withdraw, what is the procedure at the meeting? If there is no clear majority of paper ballots of those remaining, vote again using proxies as available plus physical attendance only? Vote all candidates again? What if one candidate had a majority without the pullout? Elected and vote a run off for the other two following the two candidate withdrawal? Thanks.

If candidates wish to withdraw they should be allowed to announce that fact. Presumably their supporters will not vote for them in the next round. If you have the facility to reprint the ballots, you could do so with their names removed, but that's almost an insignificant detail. Blank paper will do just as well.

And even if their names are removed, voters could still write them in if they wish to. And they are still legal votes.

Proxies are prohibited by RONR, so you will have to handle them according to your own rules. RONR advises never mixing proxies with live votes under any circumstances. You are beginning to learn why.

[hmtcastle]

RONR advises never mixing proxies with live votes under any circumstances.

Actually, the admonition (p. 409) is against combing votes by those in attendance with the mailed-in votes of absentees. Proxy holders are in attendance and (depending on the nature of the proxy) can adapt to changing circumstances (e.g. the withdrawal of a candidate or the amendment of a motion).

[Gary Novosielski]

Actually, the admonition (p. 409) is against combing votes by those in attendance with the mailed-in votes of absentees. Proxy holders are in attendance and (depending on the nature of the proxy) can adapt to changing circumstances (e.g. the withdrawal of a candidate or the amendment of a motion).

That's true, but I got the distinct impression (perhaps incorrectly) that the proxy votes were already restricted to certain candidates. If proxy holders present at the meeting are indeed free to vote, well, freely, then I'd consider them the same as live votes.

Thanks.

[J. J.]

The sign of a great parliamentarian.

The sign of being a great parliamentarian is saying, "I don't have my book, but it on p. 427."

(Without looking, I said p. 423).