VP declining becoming President

[Chris Harrison]

Say that an organization's bylaws don't have a specific provision for filling a vacancy in the office of President so the VP automatically becomes President.  Now say that the President resigns and the VP declines to become President and the assembly not knowing any better elects someone else as President.  Later in the (new?) President's term someone finally reads RONR and finds out that the first VP should have automatically became President and points this out to the assembly.

 

Who should be President if a Point of Order is then raised?  Would the person the assembly elected stay as President as a fait accompli (would the fact that they elected someone when there was a VP create a p. 251 violation)?

[Josh Martin]

Say that an organization's bylaws don't have a specific provision for filling a vacancy in the office of President so the VP automatically becomes President.  Now say that the President resigns and the VP declines to become President and the assembly not knowing any better elects someone else as President.  Later in the (new?) President's term someone finally reads RONR and finds out that the first VP should have automatically became President and points this out to the assembly.

 

Who should be President if a Point of Order is then raised?  Would the person the assembly elected stay as President as a fait accompli (would the fact that they elected someone when there was a VP create a p. 251 violation)?

 

You correctly stated in your first sentence that in this case, "the VP automatically becomes President." Therefore, when the President resigned and his resignation was accepted, the VP automatically became President, whether or not the assembly was aware of this fact. So yes, I'd say that electing someone as President when there is currently a President is a pg. 251 violation. The person who would be President is the former VP, who has been President all along.

[George Mervosh]

I agree with Josh.  The society's bylaws in your example are worded in a way to ensure there is never a vacancy in the office of President as long as there is a VP.  It would be a violation of the bylaws to elect a President in this case. 

[Dan Honemann]

I am in general agreement with Josh and with George, but I think it should at least be noted that there may be another way to view these facts.

 

Chris says that the vice-president declined to become president, which indicates that he knew (and that the assembly also knew) that he should become president upon acceptance of the president's resignation, and that he advised the assembly that he did not want to do so. This might be construed as being a request to be excused from this duty, the equivalent of a resignation, which the assembly consented to when it proceeded to elect a president. This is not quite the same thing as a situation in which a president is elected in complete ignorance of the fact that the vice-president becomes president upon acceptance of the president's resignation. 

[George Mervosh]

I am in general agreement with Josh and with George, but I think it should at least be noted that there may be another way to view these facts.

 

Chris says that the vice-president declined to become president, which indicates that he knew (and that the assembly also knew) that he should become president upon acceptance of the president's resignation, and that he advised the assembly that he did not want to do so. This might be construed as being a request to be excused from this duty, the equivalent of a resignation, which the assembly consented to when it proceeded to elect a president. This is not quite the same thing as a situation in which a president is elected in complete ignorance of the fact that the vice-president becomes president upon acceptance of the president's resignation. 

 

Thank you for mentioning this. The thread that brought about Chris' question sees several of us suggesting the same thing, although it seems they can take appropriate action before their situation gets to the point in time where we are at in Chris' set of facts.  http://robertsrules.forumflash.com/index.php?/topic/20143-how-to-officially-accept-presidents-resignation/

[Josh Martin]

Chris says that the vice-president declined to become president, which indicates that he knew (and that the assembly also knew) that he should become president upon acceptance of the president's resignation, and that he advised the assembly that he did not want to do so. This might be construed as being a request to be excused from this duty, the equivalent of a resignation, which the assembly consented to when it proceeded to elect a president.

 

Dan, to be clear, are you saying that the Vice President can decline to become President and continue serving as Vice President, so long as the assembly agrees to it?

[Dan Honemann]

Dan, to be clear, are you saying that the Vice President can decline to become President and continue serving as Vice President, so long as the assembly agrees to it?

 

I don't see why not. After all, they can certainly accept his resignation (from either office) and then elect him vice-president again if they want to.

[David A Foulkes]

I don't see why not. After all, they can certainly accept his resignation (from either office) and then elect him vice-president again if they want to.

 

This of course makes perfect sense, but -- given what we have, the VP did not tender an explicit resignation, the assembly did not knowingly "accept" one from him, nor did they hold an election to put him back in the VP's chair after electing the new president.  Bad parliamentary procedure notwithstanding, it seems that either A.) the VP IS the president, though he doesn't know it, or B.) the newly elected president is president, and either way there is a vacancy in the VP slot. 

 

Perhaps Chris can clarify if, by "the VP declines to become President" he means that the VP was offered the position and declined, or (as you suggest) he knew he was required to ascend the throne but declined, and the assemby not knowing better did the next best thing.

[Josh Martin]

This of course makes perfect sense, but -- given what we have, the VP did not tender an explicit resignation, the assembly did not knowingly "accept" one from him, nor did they hold an election to put him back in the VP's chair after electing the new president.

 

You don't agree that electing someone else as President indicates a tacit acceptance of the VP declining to take the office of President?

[Guest Edgar]

You don't agree that electing someone else as President indicates a tacit acceptance of the VP declining to take the office of President?

 

That option isn't available to the vice-president.

[Dan Honemann]

That option isn't available to the vice-president.

No, not as a right, but the assembly may permit it.

[Chris Harrison]

 

Perhaps Chris can clarify if, by "the VP declines to become President" he means that the VP was offered the position and declined, or (as you suggest) he knew he was required to ascend the throne but declined, and the assemby not knowing better did the next best thing.

 

My question was hypothetical so I can't really clarify.  The intent of my question was whether the fact that someone was elected President got the VP off the hook whether he knew he was to automatically ascend or not.

[David A Foulkes]

You don't agree that electing someone else as President indicates a tacit acceptance of the VP declining to take the office of President?

 

I think the timeline is key, and that's still unclear.  I think that if we assume the President's resignation was accepted before the VP was "offered" the position, the VP was in fact already President when the offer was extended. As I read Dan's post #7, nothing there indicates that the VP can decline to take the office of President and remain as VP.  He's either President or he has resigned, but he's no longer VP.  But I'm not a fan of grey, no matter how many shade.

[George Mervosh]

I don't see why not. After all, they can certainly accept his resignation (from either office) and then elect him vice-president again if they want to.

 

Dan - Can you help me understand the bolded portion here.  At the moment the presiding officer declares the motion to accept the President's resignation adopted, the (then) VP becomes President?  Is that correct?  If so, I don't understand how they can accept his resignation from either office, rather, they can only accept it from him as the new President.  I certainly agree with the balance of the sentence.

[Dan Honemann]

The reference to "from either office" was meant to do nothing other than state what is obviously true. The vice-president can resign from that office while he is still vice-president, or he can resign from the office of president after he has become president, and in either case the assembly can subsequently elect him to the office of vice-president if it wishes.

 

In post #1 we are provided with a bare-bones statement of facts which can be fleshed out in very different ways. As I mentioned before, I can easily imagine a situation in which a vice-president, faced with the impending resignation of the president, asks to be excused from his duty to become president if the president's resignation is accepted, and the assembly agrees to this request, allowing him to continue serving as vice-president. We know that this happens sometimes, and if someone tries to tell them that they couldn't do it, the response will be that they did. I see nothing wrong with this as far as RONR is concerned, provided that notice requirements are met (nothing is said about this in post #1, so I guess the assumption is that there is no problem).