Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Unelected officers


CornelR

Recommended Posts

Edited to add: You say the agenda is "fixed" but see FAQ #14.

 

For a political party, I would not be surprised if the agenda for the convention was fixed in the bylaws. Such a rule is clearly in the nature of a rule of order, however, so I would think the rules could be suspended by a 2/3 vote in order to hold the elections earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We did not make it. Disruption of the proceedings caused the meeting to adjourn before electing officers. Our bylaws stipulate:

 O

Section 5: The Chairman of the Republican State Central Committee shall have general administrative supervision over the organization and affairs of the Idaho Republican Party, shall preside at all meetings, and shall perform all other duties as are incident to his office, subject in all cases, however, to the direction of the Republican State Central Committee. The Chairman of the Republican State Central Committee shall be elected by the Delegates to the State Republican Convention, convening regularly every two years.

Section 6: If the office of the Chairman becomes vacant, by reason of resignation, death or otherwise, it shall be the duty of the First Vice-Chairman to convene the Republican State Central Committee within thirty (30) days for the purpose of appointing by election a new State Chairman to serve until a successor is duly elected by the next Republican State Convention. There shall be no automatic succession to the office of State Chairman.

 

The bylaws do not specifically state "until their successors are elected"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is my take on our bylaws:

 

Since no successor was elected, the chair continues in his office since this is tantamount to saying that the chair is elected to a two year term and is in office until his successor is elected at the state convention. The office has not become vacant and so no duty exists to appoint a new chairman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may be your take, but it would not be mine, based on anything in RONR.  Saying that the fact nobody was elected means that somebody was elected doesn't pass the sniff test, in my view.  Especially given that your bylaws do not say "until the election of their successors".

 

When the current terms ended, there were certainly vacancies.  And according to everything you've said, there still are. 

 

Could be you've just put yourself out of business, unless someone else is authorized to call special meetings, so as to allow you to complete your election.  But you'd better figure something out before some litigious individual convinces a judge that you don't exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We did not make it. Disruption of the proceedings caused the meeting to adjourn before electing officers. Our bylaws stipulate:

 O

Section 5: The Chairman of the Republican State Central Committee shall have general administrative supervision over the organization and affairs of the Idaho Republican Party, shall preside at all meetings, and shall perform all other duties as are incident to his office, subject in all cases, however, to the direction of the Republican State Central Committee. The Chairman of the Republican State Central Committee shall be elected by the Delegates to the State Republican Convention, convening regularly every two years.

Section 6: If the office of the Chairman becomes vacant, by reason of resignation, death or otherwise, it shall be the duty of the First Vice-Chairman to convene the Republican State Central Committee within thirty (30) days for the purpose of appointing by election a new State Chairman to serve until a successor is duly elected by the next Republican State Convention. There shall be no automatic succession to the office of State Chairman.

 

The bylaws do not specifically state "until their successors are elected"

 

"To ensure the continued services of officers in the event, for example, of public emergency or of difficulty in obtaining a nominee for an office, the unqualified wording "for a term of . . . year(s)" should be avoided, because at the end of that time there would be no officers if new ones had not been elected." (RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 573-574)

 

This would suggest at first glance that you presently have no officers. It will ultimately, however, be up to your organization to interpret its own bylaws. See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 588-591 for some Principles of Interpretation. I suspect your organization will need to seek the assistance of one or more of the following to sort this mess out: a professional parliamentarian, an attorney, and/or the parent organization (that is, the national level of your political party).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This story made the national news today . . . 

 

"By the time the convention adjourned at 3 p.m. on Saturday, about a fifth of the delegates were unseated, and people were still brandishing parliamentary rules, pointing them at establishment delegates and threatening to unseat them too."

 

Read more here. Good stuff.

 

Spoiler alert: The current chair remained in office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the WashPost news article that Poet Guest cited:

 

"people were still brandishing parliamentary rules, pointing them at establishment delegates"

 

Block that metaphor!

 

I think if we just strike the word them, it works as a non-metaphor. 

 

Although, the word brandishing is still somewhat non-literal unless they were brandishing a copy of RONR or the bylaws.  The rules themselves can only be pointed at delgates (be they establishment or counter-culture) if the rules themselves have a point.  I'm pretty confident that those in RONR do, but....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this convention, when 3:00 (the fixed time for adjournment) came, a motion was made to set aside (not sure if that was what the motion was called) the agenda and continue with the convention business. A point of inquirty was made to the motion asking what would happen if the motion didn't pass and the convention adjourned. The convention chair stated that everything would remain the same until the next convention. The same officers and platform would be in place until the next convention. This answer is what myself and others based their vote on. Without that clarification we would have voted differently.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious.  If this interpretation stands, a new parliamentary technique for conducting business is born:

 

Delegate:  Point of Inquiry, Mr. President.

President:  The delegate from Franklin is recognized for a point of inquiry, What is your inquiry?

Delegate:  The hour of 3:00 pm being upon us and the business of the session not complete, what will be the status of said business should the assembly adjourn not to be convened until a date two years from now?

President (upon consultation with the parliamentarian):  The chair deems that, upon adjournment, the pooled funds of the organization shall have been dedicated to the purchase of one, nay, two first class tickets to Tahiti, with all expenses of lodging, meals and incidentals paid for a period of two weeks, as a token of appreciation for the excellent services of both the President and the parliamentarian of this assembly.  Your point of inquiry is answered.

President:  The hour of 3:00 pm being reached, the question is "Shall we adjourn?"  All in favor say "aye," all opposed get ready to write out checks for your share of the $18,000 needed to rent the assembly hall for another day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The error of the reading of the rules has already been tendered. Attorneys have stipulated that the rules not being part of the bylaws or a formal constitution can be subject to such vagaries especially in light of the fact that the rules are poorly written and susceptible of multiple interpretations. Regardless of my views post-ruling the conflict continues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I understand it, the post-ruling conflict only continues because certain parties are still demanding their tickets to Tahiti.

 

I would advise all involved that you cannot obtain a legitimate result through illegitimate means - and then turn immediately to the remedy for vacant offices provided clearly in the Rules of the organization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious.  If this interpretation stands, a new parliamentary technique for conducting business is born:

 

Delegate:  Point of Inquiry, Mr. President.

President:  The delegate from Franklin is recognized for a point of inquiry, What is your inquiry?

Delegate:  The hour of 3:00 pm being upon us and the business of the session not complete, what will be the status of said business should the assembly adjourn not to be convened until a date two years from now?

President (upon consultation with the parliamentarian):  The chair deems that, upon adjournment, the pooled funds of the organization shall have been dedicated to the purchase of one, nay, two first class tickets to Tahiti, with all expenses of lodging, meals and incidentals paid for a period of two weeks, as a token of appreciation for the excellent services of both the President and the parliamentarian of this assembly.  Your point of inquiry is answered.

President:  The hour of 3:00 pm being reached, the question is "Shall we adjourn?"  All in favor say "aye," all opposed get ready to write out checks for your share of the $18,000 needed to rent the assembly hall for another day.

 

Well, presumably, someone would have raised a Point of Order if this happened, as they should have done in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...