(interesting) annual election update

Hi, Our association had its annual meeting to elect new board members on nov 12: 5 BD opening positions and 6 candidates on ballot. The meeting failed to reach the regular quorum (51%), but there were more than 25% ballots returned. By my questioning based on the bylaws provision, the chair of the meeting was forced to, instead of declaring "no election", give a vote by the present members at the meeting for adjourning the meeting to Dec 3 with a reduced quorum of 25%. The MM suggested and acted to send out notice of the adjourned meeting with new ballot kits only for the members who hasn't returned their ballots to the original meeting.

(my first question: the new ballot kits are the same as the originals EXCEPT there is returning stamp attached to the outer envelop. Is this fair to the first-time voters who had to pay the stamp? I think the reason for encouraging returning ballots is unacceptable because why didn't do so the first time? Could this be an election "game" play?)

At the second meeting, there were more (not many) ballots returned. The inspectors (MM) proceeded to open and count the secret ballots and came up with a very interesting result: there was one more write-in candidate and the first 3 highest voted candidates were distinguishably elected, but then there were 3 tied voted candidates for the next 2 opening positions and the last candidate was not elected. Then MM suggested to take two draws from the 3 tied candidates to make the election. So it was done -- the first time in 20 years!

(my 2nd question: does it have legal/conventional base to draw from tied candidates? especially that the two drawn candidates were absent from the meeting.)

Since I was elected and the chair adjourned the meeting (the chair was not elected), I questioned that the new board should have an organizational meeting right after the successful election, but MM suggested that it (organizational meeting) must be open and send notice to members before it takes place. -- my 3rd question: isn't the organizational meeting a part of the annual meeting after the election and so it is OPEN?

Any other comments on our election are welcome.

KW3

The procedure for adjourning the Annual Meeting on Nov 12th was correct, based on your Bylaws, which are the same as our previous ones. The proper procedure to eliminate the ties would be to hold a special election just for the individuals that tied, unless at the adjourned meeting they ALL agreed to straw vote, but since two were not present then it would have been improper to draw straws.

Based on your Bylaws, an organization should take place immediately after the adjourned special meeting and without noticing the membership, and it MUST be open to the members. The language should be written in your Bylaws, it is in ours. If you had a special election to break the ties, then the organizational meeting to elect officers would have been held directly after the special meeting was adjourned.

KW3,

If no one objected to the straw vote, IMO it was incorrect, but no harm, no foul. Make sure you do it correctly next time.

If you haven't elected officers, you can do it before the regular board meeting, then adjourn to the regular board meeting with all the officers in their proper places. You don't need to call a special meeting unless you want to. Just post both meetings side by side 4 days prior to the meetging.

Good Luck

KW3

If your next meeting is not until February 2011, I would have two Board members call a special meeting, get it properly noticed and get it over with.

Susan,

Ok, my original idea of stopping MM to attend the meeting was denied by myself at a later gathering of new BDs for the reason that some (including me) of BDs planned to get needed info from MM after the meeting. However, the likely present-to-be sounded off that she will disinvite MM to this meeting as just to give MM a message that the board is in total control. So I'll see how this go and share with you here later.