Closing Nominations and Electing Officers

[Guest Roger Hanshaw]

Assume an organization has RONR/10 as its PA and no provision in its bylaws applicable to the situation.

The usual practice is for an appointed nominating committee to prepare and secure one nominee for each of nine offices. The nominating committee presents its report and makes its nominations at the annual convention of the organization. The chair then typically takes each office individually, asking for additional nominees from the members, then taking a rising vote to elect someone to the office. The chair repeats this process for each of the nine offices.

May a member offer the following motion immediately after the report of the nominating committee is given and before the chair calls for additional nominations: "Mr. chairman, I move to close all nominations and elect the nominees presented by the nominating committee?"

This discussion has generated nearly two years worth of discussion at the organization's annual meeting, mostly focused on the applicability of the motion to close nominations, in general, and the provisions on p. 277 in particular.

[Robert B Fish]

Closing of nominations is a motion that's surely misused (perhaps as much at "tabling") that some definitive help is needed to educate people at meetings we attend.

IMO, the problem arises because people don't like the rule in RONR that may prevent the assembly from voting at all on the election of its officers.

On p277, RONR, 10th ed. we're instructed that the motion to close nominations "should not generally be moved" and on p428 we're instructed "When only one nominee is put up and the bylaws do not require a ballot, the chair can take a voice vote, or can declare that the nominee is elected."

Using the chairman's declaration in both cases could leave the assembly in the position of having "elected" new officers without ever voting on them and in my experience, this gives the impression of railroading and makes some members uncomfortable.

Perhaps the chairman's best action is to seize on the section on p428 and take a voice vote. "Since there are no further nominations, the nominations are closed. All in favor of electing these candidates say 'aye.' That is more than a majority and these candidates are elected."

Another motion would be to allow the motion "that nominations be closed, thereby electing these candidates." While it seems both accomplish the assembly's desire to actually cast a vote for their officers, the first one seems to run less afoul of RONR instructions.

-Bob

[Dan Honemann]

Closing of nominations is a motion that's surely misused (perhaps as much at "tabling") that some definitive help is needed to educate people at meetings we attend.

IMO, the problem arises because people don't like the rule in RONR that may prevent the assembly from voting at all on the election of its officers.

On p277, RONR, 10th ed. we're instructed that the motion to close nominations "should not generally be moved" and on p428 we're instructed "When only one nominee is put up and the bylaws do not require a ballot, the chair can take a voice vote, or can declare that the nominee is elected."

Using the chairman's declaration in both cases could leave the assembly in the position of having "elected" new officers without ever voting on them and in my experience, this gives the impression of railroading and makes some members uncomfortable.

Perhaps the chairman's best action is to seize on the section on p428 and take a voice vote. "Since there are no further nominations, the nominations are closed. All in favor of electing these candidates say 'aye.' That is more than a majority and these candidates are elected."

Another motion would be to allow the motion "that nominations be closed, thereby electing these candidates." While it seems both accomplish the assembly's desire to actually cast a vote for their officers, the first one seems to run less afoul of RONR instructions.

-Bob

No rule in RONR "may prevent the assembly from voting at all on the election of its officers."

I think you need to keep reading what RONR says about closing nominations on page 277.

The chair can declare a sole nominee elected only when, in fact, no one nominates, or attempts to nominate, anyone else.

[Josh Martin]

May a member offer the following motion immediately after the report of the nominating committee is given and before the chair calls for additional nominations: "Mr. chairman, I move to close all nominations and elect the nominees presented by the nominating committee?"

No, the chairman should rule the motion out of order. It is not proper to close nominations in order to advance the election of the nominees, nor is it in order to move to close nominations until a reasonable opportunity has been given for members to make nominations. (RONR, 10th ed., pg. 277, lines 8-13; pg. 428, line 35 - pg. 429, line 2)

IMO, the problem arises because people don't like the rule in RONR that may prevent the assembly from voting at all on the election of its officers.

RONR never prevents the assembly from voting on the election of officers if the assembly wishes to take a vote. While the chair may declare a sole nominee elected by acclamation, it is still in order for a member to move that a vote shall be taken by any of the accepted methods (with only one nominee for each position, a vote by ballot or by roll call would be most sensible, to allow for write-in votes, but other methods of voting are acceptable). (RONR, 10th ed., pg. 424, lines 12-15)

I do agree that some of the problem arises from members taking issue with not having a "yes/no" on a single nominee. I also think part of the problem is that many members simply feel that a formal motion is necessary to close nominations, much as in many assemblies a formal motion to adjourn is always used, even when all business has been completed. In this particular case, however, it seems to be the far more dangerous problem of members attempting to game the system to ensure the election of their preferred candidates. This seems likely since the goal is to move the motion to close nominations immediately after the report of the nominating committee, and this is certainly improper.

Another motion would be to allow the motion "that nominations be closed, thereby electing these candidates."

Such a motion is not proper. (RONR, 10th ed., pg. 428, line 35 - pg. 429, line 2)

[Guest Roger Hanshaw]

I agree with much of what has been posted, but many of the references in RONR identified in the reply posts do not directly address the question. RONR is full of examples of things that should not or must be done (motions must be seconded, for example), but most parliamentarians on this board would agree that by a 2/3 vote, the assembly can suspend those rules. I think it is worth considering this question from the "suspend the rules" perspective. RONR is inconsistent on closing nominations. On the one hand, it seems to suggest that the motion should never be used if anyone wishes to make nominations. On the other, it lists the motion and indicates that a 2/3 vote is necessary. If RONR actually meant for close nominations to be purely a formality motion and not to have the effect of stopping a minority from doing something it wished to do, then the 2/3 vote requirement would be unnecessary. [Analogous to Previous Question.] Moreover, by a majority vote, the assembly could reopen nominations by a mere majority vote, so the group is never prevented from electing a nominee it actually wants to elect, even by using the motion we're considering in this thread.

[Dan Honemann]

I agree with much of what has been posted, but many of the references in RONR identified in the reply posts do not directly address the question. RONR is full of examples of things that should not or must be done (motions must be seconded, for example), but most parliamentarians on this board would agree that by a 2/3 vote, the assembly can suspend those rules. I think it is worth considering this question from the "suspend the rules" perspective. RONR is inconsistent on closing nominations. On the one hand, it seems to suggest that the motion should never be used if anyone wishes to make nominations. On the other, it lists the motion and indicates that a 2/3 vote is necessary. If RONR actually meant for close nominations to be purely a formality motion and not to have the effect of stopping a minority from doing something it wished to do, then the 2/3 vote requirement would be unnecessary. [Analogous to Previous Question.] Moreover, by a majority vote, the assembly could reopen nominations by a mere majority vote, so the group is never prevented from electing a nominee it actually wants to elect, even by using the motion we're considering in this thread.

You asked: "May a member offer the following motion immediately after the report of the nominating committee is given and before the chair calls for additional nominations: "Mr. chairman, I move to close all nominations and elect the nominees presented by the nominating committee?"

As Mr Martin said rather clearly, the answer to the question you asked is "no".

The motion to Close Nominations "...is not in order until a reasonable opportunity to make nominations has been given ..." (RONR. 10th ed. p. 277, l. 9-11).