Elections for Vacancies

[Guest GW111]

The Chair of our organization has resigned. Our bylaws call for an election to fill the remainder of the term. The question is: if other officers wish to run for the Chair position, must they resign their seats in order to run? For example, would the Treasurer need to resign to run for Chair, therefor resulting in an election for Chair and Treasurer at the same time? Could the Treasurer then run for both the Chair and the Treasurer seat -- in order to keep the Treasurer seat if he/she lost the election for Chair? An issue is that if an  officer wins the Chair seat, then their seat is open and the process has to be done all over again (costing time and money). There is more than a year left on these officers' terms. 

Our bylaws simply say regarding vacancies:

"In the event of any such vacancy in the office of  Chairman, Vice Chairman,
Secretary, Treasurer, or District Co-Chairmen, the Central Committee shall
meet within one hundred twenty (120) days after the vacancy occurs, or the next 
Convention shall meet, whichever is sooner, upon no less than ten (10) days prior notice, for the 
purpose of electing a successor. In the interim, the Chairman is authorized to fill any
such vacancy on a temporary basis, with the advice and consent of the Executive Committee."
 

[Josh Martin]

7 minutes ago, Guest GW111 said:

The question is: if other officers wish to run for the Chair position, must they resign their seats in order to run?

No.

9 minutes ago, Guest GW111 said:

An issue is that if an  officer wins the Chair seat, then their seat is open and the process has to be done all over again (costing time and money).

That is unfortunate. Nonetheless, no rule in RONR requires anyone to resign from their current office in order to run for a different, vacant office. Based upon what you have posted, nothing in your bylaws requires this either.

[Guest GW111]

Thank you!

[Joshua Katz]

1 hour ago, Guest GW111 said:

An issue is that if an  officer wins the Chair seat, then their seat is open and the process has to be done all over again (costing time and money).

Is there a bylaw provision providing that one cannot hold two offices?  (There may be other reasons not to allow it if you're incorporated.)

[jstackpo]

And, I suppose (but some - who? - may disagree) nothing wrong with making contingent nominations, so your elections can continue at the same meeting, or not, depending on the outcomes of the prior elections.  Just be sure to give notice that if Officer Fred wins the election for Chair, member Bill will be nominated to run for the position Fred has just vacated.  The election will then take place immediately. But allow for nominations from the floor in all cases.  A little planning can go a long way.

Edited December 29, 2017 at 02:37 AM by jstackpo

[Gary Novosielski]

12 hours ago, jstackpo said:

And, I suppose (but some - who? - may disagree) nothing wrong with making contingent nominations, so your elections can continue at the same meeting, or not, depending on the outcomes of the prior elections.  Just be sure to give notice that if Officer Fred wins the election for Chair, member Bill will be nominated to run for the position Fred has just vacated.  The election will then take place immediately. But allow for nominations from the floor in all cases.  A little planning can go a long way.

I don't disagree, and I wonder whether it's necessary that the notice must include a specific name of a nominee.  Would it not be sufficient to say:

"Notice is hereby given that on <date> at <time> in <place> a special election will be held to fill the existing vacancy in the office of <office>, and potentially to fill any additional vacancies that may occur as a result of that election." 

?

 

[jstackpo]

Sure, the notice without nominee would be OK, too.   But if there are nominees, they should all be included.

[Josh Martin]

16 hours ago, jstackpo said:

And, I suppose (but some - who? - may disagree) nothing wrong with making contingent nominations, so your elections can continue at the same meeting, or not, depending on the outcomes of the prior elections.  Just be sure to give notice that if Officer Fred wins the election for Chair, member Bill will be nominated to run for the position Fred has just vacated.  The election will then take place immediately. But allow for nominations from the floor in all cases.  A little planning can go a long way.

There is certainly nothing wrong with this under RONR. There may be some question as to whether this is permissible under the organization’s bylaws.

19 hours ago, Guest GW111 said:

Our bylaws simply say regarding vacancies:

"In the event of any such vacancy in the office of  Chairman, Vice Chairman, Secretary, Treasurer, or District Co-Chairmen, the Central Committee shall meet within one hundred twenty (120) days after the vacancy occurs, or the next  Convention shall meet, whichever is sooner, upon no less than ten (10) days prior notice, for the purpose of electing a successor. In the interim, the Chairman is authorized to fill any such vacancy on a temporary basis, with the advice and consent of the Executive Committee."

It is somewhat unclear how this rule would apply to the situation you describe. It could be interpreted as requiring that the ten day notice must be given after the vacancy occurs. On the other hand, I can also see a reasonable interpretation that the notice may be given earlier, and it is only the election itself that must take place after the vacancy occurs.

Edited December 29, 2017 at 07:12 PM by Josh Martin

[Guest Who's Coming to Dinner]

7 hours ago, Gary Novosielski said:

I don't disagree, and I wonder whether it's necessary that the notice must include a specific name of a nominee.  Would it not be sufficient to say:

"Notice is hereby given that on <date> at <time> in <place> a special election will be held to fill the existing vacancy in the office of <office>, and potentially to fill any additional vacancies that may occur as a result of that election." 

?

 

It seems a bit inadequate to say that a special election may be held to fill vacancy(ies) in unnamed offices. You might as well put this notice in the call of every meeting just in case someone resigns.

[Gary Novosielski]

9 minutes ago, Guest Who's Coming to Dinner said:

It seems a bit inadequate to say that a special election may be held to fill vacancy(ies) in unnamed offices. You might as well put this notice in the call of every meeting just in case someone resigns.

No, the notice says there definitely will be an election and spells out what vacancy is to be filled.  It's not possible to say for certain that further elections will be necessary without knowing who will win the first election.