CornelR

Members
  • Content count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About CornelR

  • Birthday 09/28/1956

Profile Information

  • Location
    Sagle, Idaho

Recent Profile Visitors

159 profile views
  1. It is a terrible idea and I have encouraged them to change it several times to no avail.
  2. Thank you all, I was afraid that the lack of a quorum would prove to be a nearly insurmountable problem in this particular case. I suppose they could conduct the business to be ratified later if the incoming officers are willing to do that once they actually are elected. I will give this information to the district.
  3. One of our legislative districts has a quorum requirement in their bylaws of 33% of the voting membership of which at least two are officers. They have a meeting this weekend to reorganize, which meeting is repeated every two years. It is very possible they will not have two officers show up. The window for the meetings is 8 to 11 days after the primary which was May 17 so they can meet between the 25th and the 28th. If they do not meet, they will not be able to elect new officers nor will they be able to elect delegates to the Republican state convention in June. Is there a provision in Roberts to deal with this such as possibly electing a temporary secretary or a temporary Vice chair. The situation is this, the vice chair is angry at his treatment by the chair and is refusing to show up. The secretary resigned many months ago and is out of town anyway. It seems to me that they could elect a temporary secretary as though they were in their first meeting although they are not. The only problem with this of course is the catch 22 that they do not have a quorum to elect an officer. Any help would be appreciated.
  4. Not an amendment to bylaws rather to standing rules. Notice was given but scope addressed the vicissitudes of the procedures of the Judicial Committee. The amendment to abolish was on the motion to refer the rule changes proposed to a committee. (Again, I am reporting second-hand)
  5. Judicial committee rule established by organization 5-6years ago by addition of the rule creating and defining it and its duties. Rethought germane issue - yes should have been raised timely. Believe it was probably germane as well since it addressed much of the text of the rules surrounding the procedures of the rules committee. The motion to amend and do away with it seems appropriate. The main body will indeed have a whack at it as well. Thank you
  6. State Rules committee meeting. Addressing three resolutions related to tidying up the rules regarding the Judicial committee. Someone moved an amendment to do away with the Judicial committee. Amendment passed. Judicial committee gone (if main body approves rules committee report). Seems not germane and addresses issues not in controversy in the main motion which was to adopt the particular rule change. I was not there so details are second hand.
  7. I realize an assembly member can simply amend the Rules Committee Chair motion to deal with his pet rule if he wishes, once the rule has been suspended.
  8. It is part of our bylaws unfortunately. I do not want to go into the COTW but I am simply trying to anticipate what may come up.
  9. Ideally, the unfinished committee business would become just that - unfinished business that the committee will deal with at their next regularly scheduled meeting. Yes? None of the rule proposals are emergency needs.
  10. Our standing rules committee was unable to vet all the proposed rules. Our convention rules require all proposed rule changes be vetted through the standing rules committee. In general assembly, someone will most certainly try to address one or more of the rule proposals that were not dealt with in committee. Should that happen, the process would be in my estimation: 2/3 to suspend the committee vetting rule, resolve into committee of the whole for purpose of dealing with the rule that a member wishes to deal with. Thoughts?
  11. Our standing rules committee was unable to vet all the proposed rules. Our convention rules require all proposed rule changes be vetted through the standing rules comittee. In general assembly, someone will mosgt certainly try to address one or more of the rule proposals that were not dealt with in comittee. Should that happen, the process would be in my estimation: 2/3 to suspend the committee vetting rule, resolve into committee of the whol for purpose of dealing with the rule that a member...

  12. That is indeed being done albeit arduously resisted.
  13. 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.
  14. 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"
  15. We have a fixed agenda for our state party convention. We are not going to finish before the time to adjourn and will likely not get our officers elected. No provision in our rules or bylaws for this. Does the current board continue in their capacities as chair, sec, treas etc?