Saxywolf

I was mixing up the 2 year term with the 3 max term length of other offices. That's all. The officer in question has completed 1 of 2 years. The only sort of "exception" to this is that the chair and secretary of the meeting does not change, correct? Can the previous officers not give reports if the election was earlier in the meeting? For instance: If an officer is appointed by the board to fill an opening (this is how it is specified to be done), how does it interact with the 2 term or 3 term limit? What happens if they are appointed the meeting after elections vs the meeting before elections? What I mean is that someone *could* argue that "In no event may a member nominate more persons than there are places to fill" would mean that you cannot even nominate someone for an office until that office id vacant.

Thank you for all your responses. I can usually find my answers by searching the book and then the web (often finding them here), and while I did find the statement limiting nominations to openings, I needed a bit more for this one to help the other members understand. The devil's advocate argument for what I found was that you could then not accept a nomination for any office until the current person had left. We usually call for any nominations, of which there are almost never any nominations for positions that already have a nominee and never (that I know of) for a position that is not up for election, and then we normally accept the slate by acclimation. In the rare event that there is a runoff we hold elections by blank paper ballot and then accept the rest by acclimation. I don't believe there has been more than a handful of paper ballot votes for officers in the last few decades. We do have specific procedures and circumstances for this, but this hasn't been done in this case. At least, not yet. We traditionally just "open nominations", but not for specific positions. In fact, year after year our guide is just a table of all the positions, when they started, the number of terms allowed, term length, etc. and we just update the table each year. I think I'll mark that office in question as "Still Serving Current Term". This sounds like the real reason to back up my case for not accepting the nomination. I like the way these sound better then what I suggested. It may be pure nonsense to RONR, but it sounds like an argument. The group is not used to doing things by-the-book, but rather only by tradition. For some officers: Their term of office shall be one (1) year; with a maximum of two (2) years continuous elected service in that office for the president and the vice-president and a maximum of three (3) years continuous elected service in that office for the secretary, treasurer and financial secretary. For some other officers: Each of these individuals will be elected for a term of two (2) years with a maximum of four (4) years (two terms) of continuous elected service in that office. I have a gripe about our bylaws not being specific about when the term ends, but that is yet another issue. Nor do our bylaws specify how to handle considering appointments as a term (or not) of office. Thanks!

I'm advising a nomination committee (I shouldn't be as I'm the president whose term is 1 year, but our leader resigned so I took up the advisory role instead, but that's another story) and one of the members of the committee made it known that they wish to replace an officer of the board whose term is NOT up. The officer has only served 1 year of a 3 year term. The nomination committee member isn't planning to have the nomination committee make the nomination, but instead make it from the floor (we do allow "open nominations"). At first blush it seemed obvious that you cannot make a nomination for an office that is not vacant. The committee member claims that this is allowed because we hold "open elections" (their term). I asked for clarification and their understanding is that it is allowed because we allow nominations from the floor. The members are not used to someone running things "by the book" and I'm concerned that they may accept this reasoning. The only phrase I can find that would not allow this is "In no event may a member nominate more persons than there are places to fill." (RONV 11thEd p432 ll13-14) Which is usually taken to mean that you cannot nominate more than one person for a single office or more than n where n is the number of positions open and being voted on (e.g. members at large or board members if not elected to a particular office). But, in my view, the number of positions open for this office is 0. While this is sufficient to me, it just doesn't sound convincing. Can I get some help making it more convincing? I will be talking to the committee member before the election to try to convince them. Just in case, if they go ahead and make the nomination at the membership meeting anyway, what would my response be as chair? "You're nomination is improper and therefore invalid as you may not nominate more persons than there are places to fill for that office."?

Thanks for pointing that out Gary. I was caught up on the general definition of regular meeting on p. 89 and that "annual meeting, minutes" & "minutes, annual meeting" in the index both point to pp. 94-95, but don't mention approving annual minutes anywhere else I can find. So, in a society that has an annual membership meeting and monthly board meetings... board meeting minutes would be approved at the next board meeting even if after the annual meeting? -RONR (11th ed.), p. 473, ll. 28-29 and the annual minutes would be approved at the next annual meeting, except that it'll be a year... -RONR (11th ed.), p. 474, ll. 31-32 so, at the annual meeting, the membership should authorize the board to approve the minutes? -RONR (11th ed.), pp. 474-475, ll. 35-1