The term of the seat on the board shouldn't reset because the person elected to it is unable or unwilling to complete it. But if anybody had been paying even one iota of attention earlier, they'd have seen that they should have presented this as an election of two people to three-year terms and two people to the completion of in-progress three-year terms - by having different things people could run for, or different ways for people to vote, or just filling the spaces by percentage of the vote, or whatever. Instead of apparently electing half the board this year instead of the one-third prescribed by the bylaws. Too late now, apparently, but as you're already contravening the bylaws by having this election, why not carry on contravening them for the next one?