Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Wait time for Election of Officers


Guest SusanKCloutier

Recommended Posts

Guest SusanKCloutier

Today at a Chapter meeting a member objected to presenting and voting on a new slate of officers, stating that the Chapter must notify members and wait until the next meeting to elect them.  The Chapter By laws read that the Nominating Committee will be selected at the January meeting and present the new slate of officers at the March meeting.  There is no mention that the membership must be notified or that the vote should be postponed past the presentation of the slate in March.  Our National By laws also state that the slate is to be presented and voted on without mention of a waiting time.  The member states that these changes were voted on and are included in the Secretary's minutes but she doesn't remember when.  However, even if they were, being a part of a National Society, our Chapter By laws cannot differ from theirs.  How do I advise the Presiding Officer to act?  Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your question is not a question about Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised ("RONR", eleventh edtion, 2011).

Your question is about compliance with your own customized rules (bylaws). -- And, maybe, compliance with your National organization's rules.

***

My opinion:

• If you have no such bylaw on a waiting period, then, chances are, you have no such rule establishing a waiting period.

• If you have no such bylaw on one-month-notification, then chances are, you have no such rule demanding a one-month-notification.

• If you (collectively) adopted a rule, but your secretary cannot find the text of the rule, and the minutes do not hold the text of the rule, and some members doubt the rule even exists, then I would recommend AGAINST obeying a rule which might not exist. -- Organizations ought not enforce rules which might be false rules.

***

>> The member states that these changes were voted on and are included in the Secretary's minutes but she doesn't remember when. 

My recommendation:

• When the text of this missing rule is found, then obey it.

• Do not obey a rule which is remembered by a single person, but isn't remembered by everyone else.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Potzbie's opinion.  It is true that it is up to your organization to interpret its own bylaws and rules, but I think we can still help you.  It appears that perhaps that alleged "rule" doesn't really exist.  I agree with Potzbie that my own personal opinion is that I would not agree to follow an alleged "rule" that can't be found in writing anywhere and that the majority of members don't recall and don't believe exists.  I have seen nothing in what you provided that indicates that voting should take place at a meeting other than the one at which the nominating committee reports.  Those organizations that don't want the election to take place until the next meeting usually have such a provision in their bylaws, such as one that says, "the nominating committee shall present its report at the March meeting and  elections shall take place at the April meeting".  As Hieu Huynh pointed out, it is ultimately up to your organization to interpret its own rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personal note.

Richard B. - You may refer to me by my first name -- Kim -- if you wish. Or initials -- KG.

***

(I don't really hanker to being called "potzbie" by name. A screen name isn't exactly built for social networking purposes, but for anonymity purposes.)

(And my screen name was a typo, 20 years ago, which I kept, because it was unique and unlikely to need a numerical suffix to differentiate it from all the "potzbie" wannabes out there.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/20/2016 at 6:27 PM, potzbie said:

(I don't really hanker to being called "potzbie" by name. A screen name isn't exactly built for social networking purposes, but for anonymity purposes.)

(And my screen name was a typo, 20 years ago, which I kept, because it was unique and unlikely to need a numerical suffix to differentiate it from all the "potzbie" wannabes out there.)

You should be able to change it to Kim by going <here> and clicking on the Display Name tab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/20/2016 at 5:27 PM, Kim Goldsworthy said:

Personal note.

Richard B. - You may refer to me by my first name -- Kim -- if you wish. Or initials -- KG.

***

(I don't really hanker to being called "potzbie" by name. A screen name isn't exactly built for social networking purposes, but for anonymity purposes.)

(And my screen name was a typo, 20 years ago, which I kept, because it was unique and unlikely to need a numerical suffix to differentiate it from all the "potzbie" wannabes out there.)

 

12 hours ago, Gary Novosielski said:

You should be able to change it to Kim by going <here> and clicking on the Display Name tab.

I was going to suggest the same thing.  Kim, I see that others refer to you as Potzbie, too.  I haven't known  which way to refer to you lately, but assumed, since you left your screen name as Potzbie, that that is your preferred screen name.  Also, if you post as Potzbie but I refer to you as Kim or Mr. Goldsworthy, it confuses the original poster and others reading the forum.

Kim, you were "Kim Goldsworthy" on the old forum years ago.  At some point in the new forum, possibly when it was started, you apparently made it "Potzbie", but at some point you changed it to "Kim Goldsworthy".   You've been "Kim Goldsworthy" for most of the two years that I've been active on here again. 

However, your screen name, and lots of others, apparently got changed back to members' original screen names (and pictures!) by the system with the forum "upgrade" a couple of months ago.   The same thing happened to John Stackpole and, I believe, to Gary Novosielski.  Most of those who it happened to have changed their screen names back to their real names. 

I'll be delighted to refer to you as Kim or Mr. Goldsworthy, but if you continue to post as "Potzbie" and I refer to a post you make as having been  made by "Mr. Goldsworthy", the original poster won't have a clue who I am talking about.  

Edited to add:  Well, shucks!!!!  I just did all that typing and see that Kim has already changed his name back to Kim Goldsworthy from "Potzbie".   Thanks, Kim!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...