Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Proper procedure for an election


Sean Hunt

Recommended Posts

This is a fork of this topic, since I'm now getting into more esoteric stuff.

True... but that (correct) description of filling a blank doesn't really match the way an election by ballot is run. The "nominations are like filling a blank" analogy doesn't hold up very well.

Indeed, and I've wondered if the steps

  1. Member moves "That we proceed to elect a President." or the like
  2. After a second, the chair states the question as "Who shall the assembly elect as President?".
  3. Nominations are held.
  4. Debate.
  5. The chair puts the question to a ballot vote.
  6. Someone gets elected.

are correct - they appear to resemble the intent of the election process, but the fact that the chair must, practically speaking, put a question much different from the one moved implies that it is closer to a motion to hold an election being adopted automatically, and then the election being held. I cannot think of any other reasonable process that results in the assembly not voting once to hold the election and again to elect an officer, but this procedure doesn't quite align with what the intent seems to be. Of course, the double vote does make sense in situations where the election is not required to occur, so perhaps this is actually the effect of a requirement that an election be held - that the assembly is forced by the bylaws to effectively adopt the initial motion to hold an election, and proceeds to conduct the election as if that motion had been adopted. This actually seems quite compatible with a number of other rules - in particular the one that elections cannot be preemptively postponed.

On page 416, RONR does say that a nomination is as filling a blank in an assumed motion. But this doesn't seem to be entirely the case, as it would contradict the example on page 428 wherein the chair declares the candidate elected immediately after winning the nomination. Were it truly an assumed motion, it would still need to be adopted after the filling of the blank.

And then (and reason why I chose to branch this into a separate topic) what happens when one tries to Amend a motion in such a way as to include an election - in particular, a motion to Commit? As an example, consider the following procedure:

  1. With a main motion pending, a member moves "That the motion be referred to a committee of misters Honemann, Stackpole, and Tesser."
  2. A member moves "That three blanks be created by striking out 'misters Honemann, Stackpole, and Tesser'."
  3. The motion is adopted, and the assembly proceeds to fill the blanks.

Now what if a procedure other than normal filling of the blanks is desired, such as a usual election ballot (where individuals can vote for any candidate)? Must the motion be amended by striking out "of misters Honemann, Stackpole, and Tesser" and inserting "of three, elected by this assembly"? This seems disingenuous since it would mean that the assembly can only perform - without suspending the rules - an election in this fashion after it has decided to refer it to a committee, but it could choose to perform the method of filling the blanks either before or after having decided to refer it to a committee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, the double vote does make sense in situations where the election is not required to occur, so perhaps this is actually the effect of a requirement that an election be held - that the assembly, is forced by the bylaws to effectively adopt the initial motion to hold an election, and proceeds to conduct the election as if that motion had been adopted.

This is exactly right.

On page 416, RONR does say that a nomination is as filling a blank in an assumed motion. But this doesn't seem to be entirely the case, as it would contradict the example on page 428 wherein the chair declares the candidate elected immediately after winning the nomination. Were it truly an assumed motion, it would still need to be adopted after the filling of the blank.

You are correct, and your previous paragraph explains why a regular election differs from an ordinary motion to fill a blank.

Now what if a procedure other than normal filling of the blanks is desired, such as a usual election ballot (where individuals can vote for any candidate)? Must the motion be amended by striking out "of misters Honemann, Stackpole, and Tesser" and inserting "of three, elected by this assembly"?

A motion that the blanks be filled by ballot would be in order, and if the motion was adopted, it would be handled much like a typical election ballot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On page 416, RONR does say that a nomination is as filling a blank in an assumed motion. But this doesn't seem to be entirely the case, as it would contradict the example on page 428 wherein the chair declares the candidate elected immediately after winning the nomination. Were it truly an assumed motion, it would still need to be adopted after the filling of the blank.

Think of it as a case in which a motion containing a blank is adopted before the blank has been filled. Such a thing can occur, of course, as noted at the very end of Section 12.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok. Then what should happen?

(An answer of "Wait until the end of September" would be acceptable)

Well, to begin with, you need to set the stage.

There are very few circumstances in which it would be necessary or appropriate for a member to move "That we proceed to elect a President", so what are the circumstances you had in mind?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, to begin with, you need to set the stage.

There are very few circumstances in which it would be necessary or appropriate for a member to move "That we proceed to elect a President", so what are the circumstances you had in mind?

Suppose it is a meeting of an organization using the usual order of business, and that the bylaws require some officer to be elected at this meeting. Should the chair simply introduce the election as a general order, or even earlier? Does this depend on whether the officer is vital to the functioning of the assembly (President, Secretary) or not (Vice-President, Treasurer)?

What of a situation where an election is rescinded? If notice hasn't been provided, the assembly cannot proceed directly to an election, so they must provide notice and hold an election at the next available opportunity (hopefully at an adjourned meeting, but suppose not). At that subsequent meeting, should the chair (assuming that the officer in question is not the President or Secretary), knowing that the notice has been given, proceed to take it up as a general order or earlier?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should the chair simply introduce the election as a general order, or even earlier?

The chair should introduce the election as a special order.

Does this depend on whether the officer is vital to the functioning of the assembly (President, Secretary) or not (Vice-President, Treasurer)?

No.

What of a situation where an election is rescinded? If notice hasn't been provided, the assembly cannot proceed directly to an election, so they must provide notice and hold an election at the next available opportunity (hopefully at an adjourned meeting, but suppose not). At that subsequent meeting, should the chair (assuming that the officer in question is not the President or Secretary), knowing that the notice has been given, proceed to take it up as a general order or earlier?

A motion to fill a vacancy, in my opinion, would come under New Business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What of a situation where an election is rescinded? If notice hasn't been provided, the assembly cannot proceed directly to an election, so they must provide notice and hold an election at the next available opportunity (hopefully at an adjourned meeting, but suppose not). At that subsequent meeting, should the chair (assuming that the officer in question is not the President or Secretary), knowing that the notice has been given, proceed to take it up as a general order or earlier?

Once again, the answer to your question depends upon facts which have not been provided. Ordinarily, the time when the election is in order will have been determined by the preceding events.

In fact, a motion such as "That we proceed to elect a President", suggests that the election is not otherwise in order at the time, even assuming that notice has been given, in which event such a motion would involve a suspension of the rules. But even if such a motion is in order and is seconded, as you have posited, the chair would then state the question on the motion as follows: "It is moved and seconded that we proceed to elect a President." He certainly would not state the question as you have suggested in your step No. 2 ("Who shall the assembly elect as President?").

But you already knew all this, right? Just pulling our chain? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...