Although recent studies show many organizations have moved to online voting, some groups still rely on the US Postal Service to deliver paper ballots to voters. The postal service is looking at going into default by the end of September and expects to lose $8 billion or more this year.

The postal service is proposing major budget cuts and cost savings with several steps that may affect the delivery of paper ballots to voters:

• Eliminating 220,000 full-time jobs, in addition to the 110,000 jobs they’ve already cut in the last four years, plus 7,500 administrative jobs that are ending soon.
• Shutting down 300 processing centers by 2015.
• Closing up to 3,700 postal offices.

In addition, a new study commissioned by the inspector general revealed that the USPS could save about $1.5 billion a year if it gave itself an extra day to deliver first-class and Priority Mail, which generally arrive in 2-3 days. Other proposals include delivering mail 5 days a week or less instead of 6.

These changes raise questions for organizations that use paper ballots, such as:

• Will your organization have to send out paper ballots earlier to ensure delivery in a certain voting window? Sending out paper ballots is already a time-intensive process — when your window of mail delivery lengthens or changes, are you prepared to organize the process earlier?
• Do your voters live in areas that may lose a local post office, thus making the ballot return more of a chore? Voter turnout is one of the biggest challenges organizations face, and anything that decreases the likelihood of a voter returning a ballot should be a concern.

How is your organization conducting voting events in the age of technology? Will the changes by the USPS affect your voters?

In our series on Practical Ideas to Increase Voter Turnout, one of the ways that organizations are making it easier for voters to vote is to build a single-sign-on system that connects your members-only website with your online ballot. A single-sign-on system streamlines the online voting process by allowing voters to use familiar logins and passwords without having to memorize new information or enter a completely different system.

This helps cut down on things a voter has to keep track of and takes away a potential barrier to voting. An advanced online voting software provider (like Votenet, if we may be honest) will integrate with your organization’s association management system (AMS), connecting the voting process with the database of members and potential voters. That way voters can login through a familiar system and immediately connect with the electronic ballot.

According to Wikipedia, benefits of using a single sign-on system include:

• Reducing opportunities for phishing because users are not trained to enter password everywhere without thinking
• Reducing password fatigue from different user name and password combinations
• Reducing time spent re-entering passwords for the same identity
• Reducing IT costs due to lower number of IT help desk calls about passwords
• Security on all levels of entry/exit/access to systems without the inconvenience of re-prompting users
• Centralized reporting for compliance adherence as well as website traffic monitoring

The bottom line is that organizations need to reduce as many barriers to voting as possible, including the hoops voters need to jump through before voting. How do you streamline the voting process for your voters?

Many organizations think online voting is just for governance, but some organizations are using online voting to generate buzz in other departments.

A clever idea from the National Cooperative Business Association: they’ve created an online voting contest to ask attendees for their upcoming conference to vote on the speaker for the final breakout session at the NCBA Annual Meeting and Conference.

Speakers can nominate themselves via a written proposal or a video appeal, and they’ve opened the voting to anyone involved with cooperatives in the U.S. The winning speaker will receive complimentary full registration.

Has your organization used online voting as marketing for membership or events?

If you’re reading this, you’re spending too much time indoors this summer, says Coca-Cola. The company is taking its America Is Your Park competition to a new level with innovative options to vote for your favorite American park while you’re enjoying the summer sunshine.

Last year Coca-Cola ran an online voting contest to determine which U.S. parks were the most popular, awarding a $100,000 grant to Bear Head Lake State Park for the top title of America’s Favorite Park after they received 1.6 million online votes.

But this year Coca-Cola is taking the voting outdoors. Voters get one point for voting online, but if they use a smartphone or tablet to check in via Facebook at their park, they get 5 points. Five more points are awarded if voters upload pictures of themselves and their families at the park.

Associations could implement this strategy in their competitions as well. They could use social media check-in technology such as Facebook or foursquare to let voters at a conference choose the best new product from the expo hall or the best presentation in the education sessions.

What other ways can your organization implement more interactive online voting techniques?

When organizations consider online voting, they sometimes express concern that their members aren’t technologically savvy enough. But according to this fascinating history of email, the technology has been around since 1971.

This means that a 70-year-old voter was only 30 years old when the first email was sent. Queen Elizabeth II, who turned 85 in April,  sent her first electronic mail message in 1976. And this study by AARP shows that American’s born before 1955 make up 51% of the US population — and almost half of the people who use the Internet.

Are we perhaps underestimating the ability of a group of people who have been around the foundation of computer communication since they began their careers? We hear back from organizations all the time that they were surprised by the adoption of the technology by voters of all ages — including seniors. Perhaps the stereotype we have of seniors carries over into our decisions about new technology.

How does your organization view members over the age of 55? Are you worried about their computer ability?

Our Guest Blogger, Leah Cohen Chatinover, is of counsel at Stanger & Arnold, LLP in West Hartford, Connecticut.  She represents nonprofit organizations of all types and can be reached at lchatinover@stangerlaw.com or through her website ct-nonprofitlaw.com. This article is not a substitute for legal advice, and you should contact your attorney with specific questions.

Part Two of Two. Read Part One here.

Statutory Alternatives

In our example (see previous post), Playball’s attorney tired to implement the statutory exceptions to the requirement that directors meet in person. These exceptions can be easily adapted as modern technology progresses and should be incorporated into an organization’s bylaws.

Statutes typically allow meetings to be conducted by any means of communication as long as everyone may simultaneously hear each other.

Statutes typically also permit a board to act by unanimous written consent, if each director signs a consent describing the action to be taken. A director may compel a meeting to discuss an issue simply by withholding consent.

Combining the formality of a unanimous written consent with the simplicity of e-mail, an organization may circulate the proposed resolution as a formal consent attached to an e-mail. The organization must then collect all of the directors’ signatures. In many states, the consent may be signed electronically – \\John H. Smith\\ – for example, and delivered electronically – as a PDF attached to an e-mail.

The distinction between a formal consent attached to an e-mail, and an e-mailed poll of the board may seem inconsequential. But, note three important differences: (1) all directors must vote unanimously (2) the directors must receive a complete description of the proposed resolution and (3) they must “sign” the consent. Read the rest of this entry →

Our Guest Blogger, Leah Cohen Chatinover, is of counsel at Stanger & Arnold, LLP in West Hartford, Connecticut.  She represents nonprofit organizations of all types and can be reached at lchatinover@stangerlaw.com or through her website ct-nonprofitlaw.com. This article is not a substitute for legal advice, and you should contact your attorney with specific questions.

Part One of Two

E-mail, Facebook, Twitter . . .  the diverse modes of electronic communication have exploded over recent years. We are now able to communicate faster, cheaper and with more people simultaneously than ever before.

To busy nonprofit directors, whose schedules make board meetings seem like a luxury, a new trend in nonprofit governance has surfaced that may run afoul of the law – “voting” by e-mail.

This seems like the perfect solution. An issue or opportunity arises that calls for quick response. Directors are reluctant to attend extra meetings. Why not circulate an e-mail, ascertain that there is general agreement and take action?

The ease and speed of e-mail voting is seductively simple. But, this practice is a trap because a board that relies on e-mail voting fails to comply with legal requirements for a proper vote and exposes its decisions to attack. Nonprofit corporate statutes typically provide for board action to be taken either at a meeting (including a meeting by phone or video conference) or by unanimous written consent. Since an e-mail vote technically does not fit either category, a court could consider an e-mail vote nothing more than informal action, which is not legally valid. Even more likely, an attorney representing a nonprofit organization in a loan transaction might not be able to issue the “opinion of counsel” typically required by a lender. This could delay or derail an entire deal.

Let’s take an example. . . Read the rest of this entry →