abcdave Posted June 10, 2010 at 01:56 PM Report Share Posted June 10, 2010 at 01:56 PM Our bylaws state, "in order for an applicant to qualify for a Vice President Office, he/she must have held the prior office for a minimum of one year.The exception to this is the office of 4th Vice President which can be filled by any director who has served at least one year of satisfactory service...The term for elected officers is 2 years with a one term limit."This was an amendment to our bylaws last year (after elections) and therefore did not apply to any elections prior to this year.At our recent membership meeting, our previous president asked to be put on the ballot for president - stating that the "one term limit" referred only to "consecutive terms". He also stated that the bylaw referenced also meant (by implication?) that to be eligible to run for President, one has to have held the office of 1st Vice President for at least one year. (Our 2nd VP also asked to be put on the ballot for President.)After some discussion about "one term limit", our previous president asked to have his name removed from the ballot for president - it was moved to 1st VP and he was elected to this office. He never served as 2nd Vice President. Our 2nd VP was not able to attend this meeting and was not elected as president (or 1st VP - or anything else). As soon as he heard about the election (immediately - by phone) he voiced a protest which he filed the next day.We then learned that our mandatory operations manual had been changed (by the parent organization) to state that any election protests must be made at the time of the election. As soon as the election is over - no protests are allowed.So... can we (or MUST we) have a 1st Vice President who is - according to our bylaws - not eligible to be 1st VP?Also, can we (the board) interpret "one term limit" to mean "one consecutive term"? Also, can this election be re-done - even though (apparently) it can not be protested? (The new officers do not take office until August.)I tried to keep this as brief as I could - thank you for your patience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted June 10, 2010 at 02:17 PM Report Share Posted June 10, 2010 at 02:17 PM So... can we (or MUST we) have a 1st Vice President who is - according to our bylaws - not eligible to be 1st VP?If the member doesn't meet the qualifications for the office elected to then he can't serve and the election would be null and void (RONR p. 244a).Also, can we (the board) interpret "one term limit" to mean "one consecutive term"? That is up to you all to decide (although it is questionable if the Board has the authority to interpret the bylaws unless the bylaws give the Board that power). See RONR pp. 570-573 for some principles of interpretation.Also, can this election be re-done - even though (apparently) it can not be protested? (The new officers do not take office until August.)That depends on if the parent organization has the authority to dictate rules to you all and what exactly they mean by a "protest". If the member doesn't have the qualifications to take the office of 1st VP then there is a continuing breach and the election is null and void which may or may not be considered a "protest" under your rules.First, you all need to figure out whether the parent organization has the right to make rules for you (don't just take their word for it-ask for some rule citation). If it does turn out they have the authority you all will need to seek clarification from them as to whether a Point of Order based on a continuing breach is classified as a protest under the rules. You have until August until they take office so you should figure this out ASAP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted June 10, 2010 at 07:52 PM Report Share Posted June 10, 2010 at 07:52 PM Our bylaws state, "in order for an applicant to qualify for a Vice President Office, he/she must have held the prior office for a minimum of one year.So the only qualified 1st (2nd, 3rd) VP candidate is the current or any past 2nd (3rd, 4th) VP? This sounds troublesome.Also, can we (the board) interpret "one term limit" to mean "one consecutive term"? Also, can this election be re-done - even though (apparently) it can not be protested? (The new officers do not take office I'm not sure "one term" can be "consecutive" (at least in the manner it is typically applied in such a situation), so watch those bylaw revisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted June 10, 2010 at 08:00 PM Report Share Posted June 10, 2010 at 08:00 PM I'm not sure "one term" can be "consecutive" (at least in the manner it is typically applied in such a situation)Well, it seems clear that the question is whether the one-term limit is absolute or relative. That is, only one term and never another or only one term before someone else serves a term.Needless to say, I don't think you can insert "consecutive" if it's not there in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdave Posted June 11, 2010 at 02:01 AM Author Report Share Posted June 11, 2010 at 02:01 AM Thank you for such quick and helpful answers!It seems to me that this election (for 1st VP - not the other officers) should be declared null and void, then the bylaws should be clarified, revised and amended "effective immediately" - (perhaps making the same person who was elected eligible) - and the election could be redone. Otherwise, we will have a vacancy in this office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdave Posted June 11, 2010 at 12:31 PM Author Report Share Posted June 11, 2010 at 12:31 PM Another question - since we elected an officer who is ineligible according to our bylaws, can the president (who presided at the election) declare this election null - or does a member of the board have to raise a Point of Order? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted June 11, 2010 at 12:39 PM Report Share Posted June 11, 2010 at 12:39 PM Another question - since we elected an officer who is ineligible according to our bylaws, can the president (who presided at the election) declare this election null - or does a member of the board have to raise a Point of Order?Who elected the guy to be VP....the membership or the Board? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdave Posted June 11, 2010 at 12:42 PM Author Report Share Posted June 11, 2010 at 12:42 PM The membership - which, of course includes the board elected the VP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted June 11, 2010 at 01:22 PM Report Share Posted June 11, 2010 at 01:22 PM The membership - which, of course includes the board elected the VPIf the membership violated the rules, I don't think the Board can do a thing about it. Can you have a special meeting of the members? If so, that's where the point of order needs raised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdave Posted June 11, 2010 at 02:33 PM Author Report Share Posted June 11, 2010 at 02:33 PM We have scheduled a special membership meeting to "amend and clarify our bylaws" - several amendments have been proposed. But, since this will be a "special meeting" - can a point of order be raised about our last general membership meeting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted June 11, 2010 at 06:25 PM Report Share Posted June 11, 2010 at 06:25 PM In my opinion, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdave Posted June 11, 2010 at 06:43 PM Author Report Share Posted June 11, 2010 at 06:43 PM In my opinion, no.So who can raise a point of order - and when?Can this be added to the agenda for the special meeting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted June 11, 2010 at 07:47 PM Report Share Posted June 11, 2010 at 07:47 PM So who can raise a point of order - and when?Can this be added to the agenda for the special meeting?Any member can raise a point of order at any regular meeting but special meetings are limited to just what is mentioned in the call (the notice) of the meeting, in this case, amending the bylaws. I'm not as certain as Mr. Mervosh that a point of order challenging the legitimacy of the vice-president couldn't be raised at this special meeting but it's at best a judgment call. I think you'd have a better case if the vice-president acted as vice-president at this meeting (e.g. presided in the absence of the president). Then you could challenge his right to do so since, in your opinion, he's not qualified to hold that office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted June 11, 2010 at 08:06 PM Report Share Posted June 11, 2010 at 08:06 PM Since the ruling is subject to appeal, Mr. Mt, how will the absentees be able to debate and vote on the appeal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdave Posted June 12, 2010 at 11:47 AM Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2010 at 11:47 AM There are a couple of problems here that I don't know how to deal with - First, the 1st VP Elect was never 2nd VP and therefore not eligible per our bylaws. Also, since the bylaws also state "one term limit", this past president is also not eligible to be president if this need should arise.If we change our bylaws (and I hope we do) and this person becomes eligible - after being elected - would this mean that there is no longer a continuing breach and all problems are solved?Another problem is this - our membership meets annually - the board meets monthly. If a point of order is not raised at the special membership meeting I don't see how it could be raised at all. But I don't know if this could be added to the special meeting agenda - even with sufficient notice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted June 12, 2010 at 12:16 PM Report Share Posted June 12, 2010 at 12:16 PM ....If we change our bylaws (and I hope we do) and this person becomes eligible - after being elected - would this mean that there is no longer a continuing breach and all problems are solved?Changing the bylaws would heal the breach.....If a point of order is not raised at the special membership meeting I don't see how it could be raised at all. But I don't know if this could be added to the special meeting agenda - even with sufficient notice.I believe it would be OK to add to the topics to be considered at the special meeting, as long as notice requirements are met. There was another recent thread where this was discussed; I'll see if I can find it...ETA: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted June 12, 2010 at 12:29 PM Report Share Posted June 12, 2010 at 12:29 PM Since the ruling is subject to appeal, Mr. Mt, how will the absentees be able to debate and vote on the appeal?Good point. But what about the special condition where the allegedly illegitimate vice-president acts as vice-president at the special meeting. By your argument (which I'm not disagreeing with anymore!), his legitimacy couldn't be challenged because it was not part of the call of the meeting? I guess he's the vice-president until the next regular meeting, or a special meeting called for the purpose of determining his legitimacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted June 12, 2010 at 05:20 PM Report Share Posted June 12, 2010 at 05:20 PM Good point. But what about the special condition where the allegedly illegitimate vice-president acts as vice-president at the special meeting. By your argument (which I'm not disagreeing with anymore!), his legitimacy couldn't be challenged because it was not part of the call of the meeting? I guess he's the vice-president until the next regular meeting, or a special meeting called for the purpose of determining his legitimacy.In my opinion, exactly correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.