an election for president being a tie

[Guest Shawn A Bryant]

Just recently we held our elections including for president. Everyone voted and it was a tie. We then decided that the acting vice pesident would hold his vote (just as we have the president hold his for all other offices in order to break a tie) the vote was recast using ballets and was nolonger a tie by one vote. Two weeks later the nomanator of the losing canidate for president declared that the vice president could vote to make or break a tie and orderd us to hold another election. Is this right even though the election was declared over two weeks prior?

[Rob Elsman]

Just recently we held our elections including for president. Everyone voted and it was a tie. We then decided that the acting vice pesident would hold his vote (just as we have the president hold his for all other offices in order to break a tie) the vote was recast using ballets and was nolonger a tie by one vote. Two weeks later the nomanator of the losing canidate for president declared that the vice president could vote to make or break a tie and orderd us to hold another election. Is this right even though the election was declared over two weeks prior?

The proper procedure would have been for there to have been another round of voting, since no one garnered the necessary majority vote.

"We" don't decide to have anyone "hold his vote". The right to vote is a basic right of an individual member that cannot be subject to a "hold" except by the operation of some rule in the bylaws or as a result of a disciplinary action.

[hmtcastle]

Is this right even though the election was declared over two weeks prior?

No, not unless the vice-president was actually prevented from voting.

The procedure was improper but, assuming he went along voluntarily, it's a done deal. Next time, when you have to conduct additional rounds of voting, every member gets to vote.

[David A Foulkes]

Just recently we held our elections including for president. Everyone voted and it was a tie. We then decided that the acting vice pesident would hold his vote (just as we have the president hold his for all other offices in order to break a tie) the vote was recast using ballets and was nolonger a tie by one vote. Two weeks later the nomanator of the losing canidate for president declared that the vice president could vote to make or break a tie and orderd us to hold another election. Is this right even though the election was declared over two weeks prior?

And while it's true that the president, in most cases, can "hold his vote" and then cast it to make or break a tie, that luxury is not afforded the vice president under RONR, what your rules say notwithstanding. That was pretty much horse hockey.

[Guest Shawn A Bryant]

No, not unless the vice-president was actually prevented from voting.

The procedure was improper but, assuming he went along voluntarily, it's a done deal. Next time, when you have to conduct additional rounds of voting, every member gets to vote.

The bylaws of our organisation state "Any deciding vote will be cast by the president in force. If there should be a deciding vote for the office of president, the deciding vote will be cast by the Vice President in force.

Does that mean that the vice president gets two votes?

[J. J.]

Just recently we held our elections including for president. Everyone voted and it was a tie. We then decided that the acting vice pesident would hold his vote (just as we have the president hold his for all other offices in order to break a tie) the vote was recast using ballets and was nolonger a tie by one vote. Two weeks later the nomanator of the losing canidate for president declared that the vice president could vote to make or break a tie and orderd us to hold another election. Is this right even though the election was declared over two weeks prior?

The assembly had no right to order any member to "hold" his vote (pp. 393-4). The person who was serving as presiding officer, if a member, may cast a ballot just like all other members. As a rule, the presiding officer should not vote unless it effects the results or when the vote is taken by ballot (p. 392). Any member may decline to vote (p. 394).

It was, however, permissible to order a ballot vote after taking a voice vote (p. 273 ff.). Provided that the presiding officer (who is a member) was not prevented by the assembly from casting a ballot, the election would stand.

I am unclear if the presiding officer was prevented from voting.

[Rob Elsman]

The bylaws of our organisation state "Any deciding vote will be cast by the president in force. If there should be a deciding vote for the office of president, the deciding vote will be cast by the Vice President in force.

Does that mean that the vice president gets two votes?

If the society has adopted RONR for its parliamentary authority, it doesn't need a rule like this. I suggest the organization strike it out.

[J. J.]

The bylaws of our organisation state "Any deciding vote will be cast by the president in force. If there should be a deciding vote for the office of president, the deciding vote will be cast by the Vice President in force.

Does that mean that the vice president gets two votes?

What is the term "president in force" mean?

[hmtcastle]

Does that mean that the vice president gets two votes?

Probably not. But no one here can say what your bylaws mean. As suggested, you might want to delete this provision altogether and rely on the time-tested rules in RONR.

[hmtcastle]

What is the term "president in force" mean?

I take it to refer to the presiding officer, whether it's the president or someone else. But, clearly, these bylaws could be improved.

[Guest Shawn A. Bryant]

we have our bylaws that we run the organisation by and any dicrepency to these bylaws is to be governed by roberts rules. however the voting was all done with ballets the vice president cast his vote with the rest of the members and caused a tie we then had a discusion and it was agreed that the vice president in force would hold his vote and a revote would be done this resulted in a win by one vote.

[Gary Novosielski]

The bylaws of our organisation state "Any deciding vote will be cast by the president in force. If there should be a deciding vote for the office of president, the deciding vote will be cast by the Vice President in force.

Does that mean that the vice president gets two votes?

Nobody ever gets two votes.

If he already voted in the election he does NOT get to cast another "deciding" vote.

[J. J.]

Nobody ever gets two votes.

If he already voted in the election he does NOT get to cast another "deciding" vote.

Someone could get more than one vote, if the bylaws so provide.

I can't tell if they would, in this case.

[Gary Novosielski]

Someone could get more than one vote, if the bylaws so provide.

I can't tell if they would, in this case.

If the bylaws so provide, then a pox upon them.