Guest dan Posted December 30, 2010 at 10:24 PM Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 at 10:24 PM I am a member of a group (regional, professional, information sharing) that has grown and the group's bylaws need to be updated. The committee drafting proposed revisions provides, in the draft proposal, to allow absentee votes, both at elections and motions. If adopted, there would be mixed in-person and absentee votes for elections and motions.I am trying, unsuccessfully so far, to convince the committee that this is a bad idea. I have cited an example of a motion that would be made at a meeting, and the motion amended during the meeting, so that the final motion being voted on differs from the absentee votes made before the meeting. The same kinds of issues arise with mixing in person elections and counting an absentee ballot. I think use of absentee votes this way could create a real mess.Any other suggestions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Goldsworthy Posted December 30, 2010 at 10:40 PM Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 at 10:40 PM I am a member of a group (regional, professional, information sharing) that has grown and the group's bylaws need to be updated. The committee drafting proposed revisions provides, in the draft proposal, to allow absentee votes, both at elections and motions. If adopted, there would be mixed in-person and absentee votes for elections and motions.I am trying, unsuccessfully so far, to convince the committee that this is a bad idea. I have cited an example of a motion that would be made at a meeting, and the motion amended during the meeting, so that the final motion being voted on differs from the absentee votes made before the meeting. The same kinds of issues arise with mixing in person elections and counting an absentee ballot. I think use of absentee votes this way could create a real mess.Any other suggestions?Yes. Whatever it is they propose, AMEND IT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted December 30, 2010 at 10:58 PM Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 at 10:58 PM Yes. Whatever it is they propose, AMEND IT.Kim, I do think dan wants suggestions as to convincing the electorate to vote in favor of the amendment. Don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted December 30, 2010 at 11:03 PM Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 at 11:03 PM Any other suggestions?You might compromise by suggesting the use of proxies. That way the person doing the voting (the proxy holder) will be present and (depending on the nature of the proxy) could adapt to changing circumstances.There may also be legitimate reasons for authorizing absentee voting but it should never be combined with "in person" voting (for the reasons you've already indicated).In any event, if the proposals of the committee are unwise, you're free to speak against them when the question comes before the general membership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted December 31, 2010 at 12:15 AM Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 at 12:15 AM Any other suggestions?Try RONR(10th ed.), p. 409, l. 4-15. (How do you people get by without me? ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted December 31, 2010 at 05:59 AM Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 at 05:59 AM There is a workaround, but it requires the absentee ballots to be cast after the motion has been voted on at the meeting, but it is cumbersome.This the problem with doing it before:The motion submitted to the members is, "That the president's mileage to the conference be paid for by the society."At the meeting, that is amended to, "That the president be bought a new car by the society to drive to the conference."All the absentees may agree with the first and strongly oppose the second. The voted for the first, but how did they vote on the hugely amended motion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.