These are the results of the election of 2009 officers and directors of the South Bay Community Network, Inc., a non-profit California corporation. These results include the voting for President and two Director seats.
There was no voting for Vice President because there were no volunteers in time for the election - that position will be filled as a vacancy via appointment by the president and approval by the board. Contact the president if interested.
Submitted by the 2009 Election Committee
John Delaney
Owen DeLong
Ian Kluft
More information on STV and other voting systems can be found at the Single transferable vote article at Wikipedia and other sites.
The tables in these results show in detail how the results were obtained. Each of the "rounds" shown were separate passes through the data by the vote-counting software. Multiple passes are necessary to count an STV-style vote.
Candidates for Vice President (1 seat available): none (to be filled as a vacancy after the election)
Candidates for Director (2 seats available): Bill Dale, Mark Whittington
| Choice | Abbrev | Description |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | PRES-ANDERSON | Craig Anderson |
The following options did not rank in the results:
| Abbrev | Description |
|---|---|
| PRES-NONE | None of these |
| Round #1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Selection | Votes | Percent | Notes |
| PRES-ANDERSON | 10 | 100.00% | winner for Choice #1 (50.000% of each vote used, 50.000% transfers) |
| PRES-NONE | 0 | 0.00% | |
| Choice | Abbrev | Description |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | DIR-DALE | Bill Dale |
| #2 | DIR-WHITTINGTON | Mark Whittington |
The following options did not rank in the results:
| Abbrev | Description |
|---|---|
| DIR-NONE | None of these |
| Round #1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Selection | Votes | Percent | Notes |
| DIR-DALE | 5 | 55.56% | winner for Choice #1 (60.000% of each vote used, 40.000% transfers) |
| DIR-WHITTINGTON | 4 | 44.44% | |
| DIR-NONE | 0 | 0.00% | |
| Note: one of the ballots selected first choice for both Bill Dale and Mark Whittington. The software is not able to process such a vote. In order to preserve the intent of the voter, a manual count confirmed there is no difference in the result, as expected from a vote which expresses approval but no preference. | |||
| Round #2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Selection | Votes | Percent | Notes |
| DIR-WHITTINGTON | 6 | 100.00% | winner for Choice #2 (33.333% of each vote used, 66.667% transfers) |
| DIR-NONE | 0 | 0.00% | |