KimK

Thank you gentlemen! I will be more than prepared.

Thank you! I'm going to have Fear the Wrath of Kimberly on my mind this evening.

Thank you! Sorry I was typing fast. Plus I'm irritated at this sudden turn of events when members have had the slate since January, and that there are 3 positions open. The threshold is majority of votes cast. Our bylaws actually do NOT indicate the right to vote from the floor. I had to go back and check. This is just something that is done on the national level (we are a national org and I am referring to a local chapter) - so our local chapter follows suit. It is in RRNO if I'm not mistaken?? I warned a member that someone could challenge the request of the nominating committee since it isn't listed that running from the floor requires 24 hours advance notice. You're correct, I meant to type that 1 term = 2 full years. The implication is that the member with one year left actually WANTS to leave after 1 year. To stay would mean to have to continue to pay dues for that year. Members are thrilled to "graduate out" (the term we use) because it's a pretty big rite of passage. So if this member with 1 year left did win the election, according to our bylaws, they'd have to defer a year -- extremely undesirable and unheard of. The fact that members are "fishing" around to see what would happen if this member won, then "graduated out" after a year, is what's irritating. To even suggest that they would do that is, in my opinion, pre-planning to go against the bylaws in order to prevent the "undesired" original candidate from running. Which is why I am proposing an amendment to include the loss of legacy penalty for any member that runs with the intention to leave after one year (unless a verifiable emergency).

I am searching the archives and have spent some time reading but can't find the exact answer and I need to get out an email before people eat each other alive (sort of). Our organization elects officers this evening. None of the candidates have opposition. However, there are 3 positions that no one is running for and several members that aren't happy with the candidate running for President and the candidate running for VP. We vote by secret ballot for these positions every 2 years. Our bylaws indicate that the candidate who receives the majority of votes of members present is the winner. Our bylaws allow for members to run from the floor. Our nominating committee asked that members wanting to run from the floor submit their info to the committee so the committee can ensure that they have the proper credentials to run (something that takes 2 minutes to determine) -- the credentialing process is NOT in our bylaws. My questions are: 1. If there is only one person running for each office, do we still have to cast a ballot? 2. If the answer to the above is yes, and that one person doesn't get a majority vote, how many times do we have to continue voting? (our bylaws do not specify) 3. Since our bylaws have no specifications on WHEN a member can run from the floor, could a member decide to run from the floor this evening even though they did not provide their info to the nominating committee in advance as requested? BONUS question: Our bylaws state that members stop becoming members once their child turns 20. Due to the issues some have with the current member running for president (who's children are still young), members have asked if a member with one year left could run (implying that one of them would run from the floor this evening). There was a back and forth of semantics but our bylaws are clear that an elected officer serves a term of 2 years. Yes officers have had to step down for emergency or other reasons, but to PLAN in advance to step down after a year appears to be a violation of the bylaws (which is a grieveable offense that could result in that member losing their legacy status - something to pass on to their child who would then not have to go through the selection process to become a member -- which is a HUGE incentive in this organization). Our bylaws state: "Members with one year left in the chapter are eligible to run for office. If elected, those members are expected to complete the 2 full terms of office, pay dues and assessments as required by all active members." How should the group handle this if one of the members with one year left does run from the floor? I suggested amending the bylaw to state the penalty of losing their legacy status unless the reason for leaving after 1 year is a verifiable emergency. Sorry so long...one thing that makes me happy though is that members are actually finally reading the bylaws.

Thank you. I will be suggesting an amendment to make the wording more clear.

The Financial Secretary sent out a note on 9/22 stating that a member's age group assessment due on 9/15 was late and the member now owes the 20% late fee. The member provided proof that they sent the payment directly from the bank using the bank's electronic payment system. The transaction at the bank is dated 9/15. The Financial Secretary states that the envelope does not have a postmark and that it was received on 9/21. Upon further investigation, the member provided a copy of the bank transaction showing that they made the online request from their bank on 9/14, the check is dated 9/15, and lists as "sent" from the bank's record on 9/15, shows an expected receipt date at the destination (which would be to the financial secretary) of 9/21. The member hasn't provided the final information as of yet. Should the "sent on 9/15" document from the bank be enough to indicate that it was indeed postmarked by that date? You will notice the term postmarked is not included in the bylaws below however "postmarked by" is widely understood and often used in the organization. Thanks in advance. Section 3. Chapter Penalties Members who have not paid their chapter dues by May 31, age group assessments by September 15, and any other assessments and/or fees (i.e. conference, convention, cluster registration) by the determined due date, shall pay a twenty percent (20%) late fee. The late fee must be paid with the dues, assessments, and/or fees. Failure to pay the late fee could result in removal from the chapter.

Thank you everyone! I hope that they've learned a lesson from this. It has been an interesting year to say the least.

Apparently the Adult adviser has been doing this all year. She's supposed to advise but the Teens are supposed to run everything. So I'd say she has taken over from day one (August of last year). I don't attend the meetings but since I interpret our bylaws for our adult meetings, I'm being asked about this. Our adult bylaws state that the local bylaws can't be more restrictive than the national bylaws. The National bylaws state that if there is anything that is in question, Roberts Rules of Order is to be consulted.

Thanks everyone. Apparently there is contention and it seems like it is personal. The Teen President did not run the election, the Adult Teen adviser did. This adult also happens to be the mother of the teen who changed and decided that she would run for President instead. The other Presidential nominee is the daughter of our new President whose election win was a shock to several of the "old" members. I have a knack for following the rules and I don't hold the position of Parliamentarian or Protocol chair but those officers do not contribute to meetings at all, therefore, I am the one who is called upon since everyone knows I read and am fascinated by this stuff. The new (Adult) President met with the Adult advisers to say that the process was incorrect. The teen bylaws do not spell out ANY sort of election process therefore, they are supposed to look to the adult group bylaws which indicate that a nominating committee is voted on by the body then that committee presents the names of candidates. Does the President have any recourse in stating that the teens did not use a nominating committee as stated in the adult bylaws?