Scott

[Guest Guest]

If a motion is presented to vote on a slate of 30 candidates,

what kind of motion is needed to divide the question, that is to pull out some names

and vote on them individually. Is it one member's request, a majority vote, 2/3, etc.?

[g40]

Unless you have specific provisions in your governing documents, elections are votes for the candidate(s) of your choice. You do not vote against any candidate, except for voting for another. How many positions are up for election and how many candidates are running for those positions?

[Guest Scott]

The question is 30 candidates for different offices are being presented as a slate to a committee,

what does it take to pull some of the candates out of the slate to vote on them individually?

 

[Guest Edgar]

There is no "slate". Vote for as many or as few of the candidates as you wish. Or vote for other candidates who aren't on the "slate".

 

Who is presenting this "slate" and what gives them the authority to do so?

[g40]

However, if there are exactly 30 offices and one (and only one) candidate for each office, then each candidate would be elected by acclamation. We do not know the specifics from the OP, though.

[Guest Scott]

the "slate" is a list of candidates for officers, presented as a group to vote on to a committee, all in one vote,

how does one pull out individual names?

[Guest Edgar]

One "pulls out individual names" by simply voting for some candidates and not others.

 

Once again, there is no slate.

[Josh Martin]

the "slate" is a list of candidates for officers, presented as a group to vote on to a committee, all in one vote,

how does one pull out individual names?

 

A request by a single member is more than sufficient. I also concur with my colleagues that the names should not be combined in the first place. Each office should be voted on separately.

[g40]

A request by a single member is more than sufficient. I also concur with my colleagues that the names should not be combined in the first place. Each office should be voted on separately.

In some circumstances, not necessarily. As an example, I am a Board member (seven person board) where the Board, at its "organizational meeting", held right after the annual meeting of members, elects officers, appoints committees, etc. This is all according to the organization's bylaws. Almost always, there is general consensus of all board members of all such officers, committee members, etc. We, therefore, have one motion to nominate individuals to all the positions (one nominee per position). Since there are no other nominees, all are elected by acclamation. Of course, if any board member were not in full agreement and wished to nominate another individual, we would conduct that election separately.

[Josh Martin]

Almost always, there is general consensus of all board members of all such officers, committee members, etc. We, therefore, have one motion to nominate individuals to all the positions (one nominee per position). Since there are no other nominees, all are elected by acclamation. Of course, if any board member were not in full agreement and wished to nominate another individual, we would conduct that election separately.

 

My understanding of RONR is that, strictly speaking, each office should be declared elected by acclamation separately, although with unanimous consent I suppose this could be waived.

 

So long as we are all in agreement that if an organization uses a slate, a single member may request a separate vote on a particular office, that's the important thing. I won't fight you further on the slate, although Edgar might.

[Guest Guest]

I take it the request by one member to pull any names out for vote does not require a majority vote of the committee?

[Josh Martin]

I take it the request by one member to pull any names out for vote does not require a majority vote of the committee?

 

It does not.

[Gary c Tesser]

It does not.

You might more bluntly, and perhaps accurately, call it a requirement, or a demand.

[Guest Scott]

What is the Chapter, rule, etc. that gives this right to separate consideration?

[Josh Martin]

What is the Chapter, rule, etc. that gives this right to separate consideration?

 

See Section 27 - Division of a Question. Separate offices are unrelated topics, so they can be divided upon the demand of an individual member.

 

I'll point out one last time that a motion to elect a slate of 30 candidates is out of order to begin with, but since it seems you'll have a hard enough time persuading them to take a separate vote on just one office, perhaps it's best not to push your luck.

[Gary Novosielski]

the "slate" is a list of candidates for officers, presented as a group to vote on to a committee, all in one vote,

how does one pull out individual names?

The question is how did all these candidates get put together as a "slate"?  There is nothing in RONR that would authorize this.

 

Therefore, there is no "slate".  There is merely a list of candidates (nominees) for a list of positions.  

 

Voting on them as a group (up or down) would not be in order in the first place, so there should be no need to pull them out.  They were never in.  If someone moves to "accept the entire slate", raise a point of order that this is not a proper form of election.

[Guest Scott]

I take it we mean Chapter 24, "Division of a Question...." is the basis.

[Dan Honemann]

I take it we mean Chapter 24, "Division of a Question...." is the basis.

Nope.

[Guest Edgar]

I take it we mean Chapter 24, "Division of a Question...." is the basis.

 

There is nothing to divide.

 

There is no slate.

 

There is no slate.

 

There is no slate.

[Josh Martin]

I take it we mean Chapter 24, "Division of a Question...." is the basis.

 

Nope, I mean Section 27 - Division of a Question. There is no Ch. 24 in the current edition (11th edition - 2011), and Section 24 is about Appeal.

 

I'm guessing that you're looking at Section 24 - Division of a Question, and Consideration by Paragraph in the 4th edition (1915), as that is the edition which is commonly available online. You should read up on The Right Book.

 

Of course, if you really want to follow the rules, and lower Edgar's blood pressure, you should read up on Point of Order and Appeal instead, which are in Sections 23 and 24 in the current edition, and put an end to this whole business of voting on a slate.

[Guest Scott]

Okay, it looks like the 11th edition is not online.

 

Only to clarify, the voting on the slate is actually a recommendation, omnibus from one committee to another. The recommendation becomes the endorsements of the hypothetical 30 candidates for almost as many offices.

 

I'm not sure if it beeing a recommendation, which when received becomes an endorsement, if that makes any difference.

[Josh Martin]

Only to clarify, the voting on the slate is actually a recommendation, omnibus from one committee to another. The recommendation becomes the endorsements of the hypothetical 30 candidates for almost as many offices.

 

I'm not sure if it beeing a recommendation, which when received becomes an endorsement, if that makes any difference.

 

Yeah, it makes a difference. Since you're not actually electing anyone to office, a single motion would be acceptable. I don't think it changes the rest. A single request should still be sufficient to request a separate vote on a candidate.

[Guest Scott]

So, one committee has been charged to make 30 recommendations for various offices, but the receiving committee, by receiving the report is accepting all 30 recommendations.

 

Can one member request (demand) that one of the recommendation for office be pulled,

or would it be an amendment to a motion to accept the slate, subject to second and majority vote?

[Bruce Lages]

Just out of curiosity, what will the receiving committee do with these 30 recommendations for office?

[Josh Martin]

Can one member request (demand) that one of the recommendation for office be pulled,

or would it be an amendment to a motion to accept the slate, subject to second and majority vote?

 

One member's request is sufficient.