[Advice offered with regard to the Vote of No Confidence Resolution on the Chancellor 2/5/2006]
ASB 310 leaves the Division free to craft its own rules for elections, subject to being consistent with pertinent Systemwide Bylaws. ASB 340(B) -- which pertains to Divisional ballots on matters such as Resolutions -- incorporates ASB 95, which is the controlling Systemwide Bylaw governing this election. DDB 17 also controls this election, except where it is in conflict with ASB 95. Therefore,
a) DDB 17 specifies 7 instructional days for the return of ballots. However, this is inconsistent with ASB 95, which specifies that at least 14 calendar days must be allowed. A Divisional Bylaw is overridden by a conflicting Systemwide Bylaw, and therefore we must allow at least 14 calendar days for the return of ballots.
b) DDB 17 specifies that the mail ballot must include all duly submitted pro and con arguments which do not exceed two pages each. (The Secretary has exercised her authority to impose a two-page limit on each argument.) This is consistent with ASB 95 which specifies that the ballots are to be accompanied by such additional material as the Division may direct. (All arguments, including those exceeding two pages and those submitted by persons not in the Senate, were also posted in a Forum on the Senate web site.)
c) ASB 95 also specifies that "a brief summary of arguments pro and con" be included with the ballot, and the Divisional Bylaws are silent on this matter. DDB 13(F) specifies that the Secretary conducts elections requiring a mail ballot under the supervision of CERJ. The Secretary must therefore prepare a brief summary of the duly submitted pro and con arguments for inclusion with the ballot.