Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'election'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • RONR Message Board – Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised
    • General Discussion
    • Advanced Discussion
    • The Robert’s Rules Website
  • About the Message Board
    • Questions or Comments about the Message Board


There are no results to display.

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Found 141 results

  1. Hello all, A community Civic Club with much confusion within currently just held it's election. The current secretary ran for president and won without resigning from his secretary role. Currently, he holds both the secretary and president position. Whats the rule of thumb when it comes to 1.) holding two positions at once and 2.) is the secretary required to step down before running for president so that the secretary role can be filled? Thank you, BrodysDad
  2. Guest

    Ineligible Candidate

    Our organization held elections a month ago and it has been discovered that the creditials of candidates (per the bylaws) were never truly certified and subsequently an ineligible person was elected to an office. How do we proceed with handling prior to installation of officers?
  3. We have a situation where someone nominated for an office is trying to drop out of a two person election in order to force the election of the other member. This has enraged other members believing that when the nominations were closed that the person who is intending to drop out to manipulate the election was willing to serve and would easily be elected, thus there were no further nominations and were closed per our By-laws. Also per our by-laws nominations were closed a month ago, with no provision for re-opening. Those who are outraged by the threat of this nominee to drop out of the race, in order to give the election to the other person who many people do not get along with has caused great concern and conflict. The two members involved have publicly told others there is nothing anyone can do about it and if members try to do something about it, the one if not elected will sue the company. Those who are outraged have held a caucus and are planning to write-in another name. If I understand ROR correctly, since our by-laws do not cover this action, once the person accepted the nomination and was present during the nomination process, that person remains on the ballot regardless of what they say about trying to decline. I saw someone in this forum has stated that a person once nominated "can not un-nominate themselves". Therefore, there is a ballot and not an election the member by being unopposed and because there is a ballot election, a write-in is possible. Is that correct? As one of the parliamentarians I have been asked by both sides what is possible and what is not.
  4. If an association's government documents are silent on the following: (1) Does RONR require the entire Board's approval or just the Board President's approval to create committees? (2) Does RONR require that the chair of these committees must be Board members? If no, then does RONR require that at least one committee member be a Board director? (3) Does RONR require the Board President to appoint the committee chair? And, if so, does RONR allow the President to appoint himself? (4) Under what circumstances does RONR allow the committee to elect its own chair who may or may not be a director? At issue is an "Election Committee" which association members desired because of their awareness of problems with "improper/defective/botched/fixed" elections in the last three consecutive Board elections. (The first of these three elections seated the current President on the Board when the then-current Board failed to notify the general membership of open directorships and instead endorsed his election, and the last two elections occurred under his administration as President.) This Board President appointed himself chair of this "Election Committee." This, despite the possibility that he, too, may be a candidate for re-election. (In the past, he has appointed himself chair of other association committees, too.)
  5. Hello, I thought that I was elected to a board but now others say I was not. The minutes, I believe were mistranscribed. they read as follows: MOTION: Tom made the motion to amend the bylaws to increase the board to 11 members. 2nd: Pete. Carried unanimously. MOTION: made by Tom to nominate Jerry to the board 2nd: Alice. Carried unanimously My question is this: Tom made a motion to "elect" but we believe that it was mistranscribed and to "nominate" was put into the minutes. Question: The by-laws were amended to increase the board so that Jerry could be elected. Even if the minutes were not mistranscribed, doesn't that prove our point that Jerry was elected? Question: Isn't a nomination always followed by an election. Question: Isn't it true that a nominating board or an individual nominated, and that a full board elects (as in this case, the full board voted) THANK YOU ADVANCE FOR answering my questions. Eloise
  6. Guest

    Election Procedure

    In the following motions is “accept the nominations” the same as elect, or did the motion have to say “elect” Fred nominated the following as officers: David Groff - President, Anna French - Vice-President, Timothy Webber - Treasurer, Susan Frost - Secretary, A motion was made by Fred Mann to accept the the nominations, seconded by Debbie Pearce Motion approved: all in favor, no abstentions.
  7. Guest

    Declined Nomination

    Per our by laws, we nominate eligible members for the executive committee positions this month and vote next. If a member was nominated for a position, but verbally declines the nomination to the membership, can that person still be a write in vote?
  8. I recently observed a meeting where a 12 member board attempted to elect new officers of the board and their was a major disagreement when all of the elections ended in 6-6 tie votes Background: The board is currently split into 2 "blocs" of 6 members each. One voting all to retain the current board officers and one all voting for the new nominees. Their charter states that the board " select from , within the group a President, a Vice-President, a Secretary, and a Treasurer who shall continue in office for the period of two (2) years or until their successors are elected and seated. " In their bylaws it states "Roberts' Rules shall govern its meetings".It also states under the duties of the officers that the president "shall: Not vote in meetings of the *board organization* except in the case a of tie." The election was handed during a properly called special meeting. Motions were passed nominating board members for each position. A motion was passed to hold elections and a motion was passed to hold a roll call vote for the elections. Following a series of tied votes and recesses, the argument was made that the president should abstain from voting as the by-laws supersede Roberts rules. Another vote was held, with the president abstaining, and the sitting president lost his seat to the other nominee 6-5. In the next votes for the remaining officer positions, following another argument, the newly voted president had to abstain and the former president voted instead. All the remaining current officers were reelected 6-5. The new president also acted as chair for the remainder of the meeting. My questions are: what is the rule when Roberts rules of order conflict with the by-laws? And when are elected officers considered "seated"? Should the sitting president have continued in his role for the duration of the election, the duration of the meeting? There is nothing in the charter or by-laws besides what i have quoted here that pertains to the election of officers.
  9. When the club's slate of officers for the upcoming year (as compiled by the nominating committee) is past the deadline for distribution to the membership, does that deem the slate null and void? Our club Bylaws do not specify what the penalty is for a slate not being out to the membership by the deadline.
  10. If an officer is voted to be removed from the board, is there anything that states they cannot re-run at another time for a future board/officer position (as an officer)?
  11. I would greatly appreciate your assistance. A challenge has been made as follows (I've tried to remove identifying information): On [DATE], {A} got 97 Delegates, {B} got 219, there was 1 uncommitted delegate. At the county convention, they seated 97 {B} delegates, 222 {B} delegates. We won 5 of 18 delegates to the {current/about to happen meeting}, but if you take away the 2 extra delegates seated (assuming the 1 uncommitted went for {B} ... not sure that this is the case, but it doesn't matter) we would have won 6 of 18 delegates. Math as it was done: 97 of 319 total delegates. That came out to .30407 X 18 = 5.47 CD delegates. Rounds to 5. Math as it should have been done: 97 of 317 total delegates. That equals .30599% x 18 = 5.507 CD Delegates. Rounds to 6. Proposed Solution: As the vote numbers are unavailable to us, we are proposing that an alternate from the same {area/district} fill the spot. *** The challenge has been submitted to the challenge committee which reports to the credentials committee. The challenge is referencing an election done by a different set of delegates at a previous, lower level meeting of different delegates. I'm not sure who 'we' is but I assume it is a proponent for {A}. The questions I have are as follows: Is this a violation of a continuing nature? If yes how do you fix as it is not practical to reconvene the previous delegates? Note: it is not in the bylaws but it is in a higher authority document. Is a delegate disqualified because the election was done wrong? What do you think of the proposed (not be me) solution?
  12. This is an election year for our boosters. Six months ago we amended the bylaws in which the founding board members (who also drafted the original bylaws) were involved both prior to and during the amendment process. At no time did they express any desire to amend the election policy. Bylaws require the board to solicit candidates in March and Any Member that wishes to serve in an Executive Board position must communicate to the Secretary their intention to do so by April 15. It clearly states that If a position has received at least one candidate by April 15 no more candidates will be accepted after this date for this position. Guess what? The former Exec Vice President (also one of the founding members and author of the bylaws, submitted his name with his intent to run, however he would not reveal which office he was seeking. He finally notified us on at the deadline that he would be running against the incumbent. We did offer another open board position, but he declined. The incumbent, is doing a very good job, and decides to allow the election process continue and accept whatever election results unfolds.Tonight, the former Exec Vice President wants to submit an agenda item to amend the bylaws, specifically the election policy ( at our last general meeting which is the election meeting) following is his amendment proposal: Candidates for Executive Board positions may be nominated at the General Boosters Meeting, even if they have not previously communicated an intention to do so. Nominations for each Executive Board position will be accepted at the General Boosters Meeting, immediately before the election for that position. I am quite baffled at the timing of his amendment request. Not only is this the last general meeting, we also need to vote on some big purchases, vote on next yr's budget and the election. NOTE all other board positions will be confirmed, the Exec. VP is the only position which received a an intent to run. I am the current President returning, unopposed and would rather not have to work with someone so calculating. 1. I believe his amendment proposal will do more harm to our Booster group than good. 2. Since this is an election meeting, can we to follow current bylaws in regards to the election process.
  13. Is there ordinarily debate after nominations are closed? Or does an election immediately follow the closing of nominations without debate? Our bylaws provide that we follow Robert's Rules when not inconsistent with the bylaws. For a particular election, the bylaws provide that candidates must submit their names in advance of the meeting (no nominations are allowed from the floor), and that each candidate is entitled to address the assembly for a specified period of time. The bylaws provide that the election is conducted by written ballot. However, the bylaws do not specify whether debate is allowed after the candidates have spoken. I have read Roberts Rules and I'm still in doubt about whether debate is allowed or expected after nominations are closed. Here are my questions, which are obviously related: 1. After the last candidate has spoken, do we proceed immediately to written balloting, without checking to see if debate is sought? 2. After the last candidate has spoken, if someone seeks to be recognized for purposes of debate, is it in order for the chair to do so? 3. After the last candidate has spoken, if the body wishes to proceed to balloting but some people wish to be recognized for debate, must the chair seek and process a motion to end debate?
  14. I have a question about the Nominating Committee: On page 433 of RONR, it states: "Members of the nominating committee are not barred from becoming nominees for office themselves. To make such a requirement would mean, first, that service on the nominating committee carried a penalty by depriving its members of one of their privileges; and second, that appointment or election to the nominating committee could be used to prevent a member from becoming a nominee. " My question is how would the appointment/election stop a person from being a candidate - I mean if being a member of the committee would bar me from running for office, and I was interested in doing so, then why would I accept the appointment or election to the committee? Or, if after accepting to be on the committee I decided to run for office, what would stop me from resigning from the committee in order to run? Or volunteer from the floor - as the committee is discharged as soon as it makes its report. Thanks in advance.
  15. This is a two-part question for a PTO since our bylaws are very vague: 1. We currently have a vacant president position. If our VP of fundraising wants to run for the vacant president position in our standard election, does the VP of fundraising need to vacate their role before going on the ballot for the election or can they finish out their term and then resign from their position (if elected)? The thinking is since the election and role of president would be for positions starting in August, the VP of fundraising would finish out their term and then move into the role of president when the new term commences. 2. If VP of fundraising moves into the role of president (effective for the new term) we then end up with a vacant seat for VP of fundraising. It appears from the vague bylaws that the (new) president can then appoint somebody to move into that now vacant role of VP of fundraising. The bylaws do not state whether or not this person who is appointed needs to already be on the board. Any feedback on whether or not this person needs to be on the board at the time of being appointed? We have a current board member who wants to take over this role, but she's trying to determine if she needs to rerun for her current position, member at large, in this upcoming election. The reason for the concern is if positions shift around as suspected then we end up with one empty member at large position that technically doesn't need to be filled/appointed if vacated. I hope this makes sense even though I'm sure it sounds pretty confusing.
  16. At annual meeting to elect officers, can association member ask for vote (voice or hand) for each officer as opposed to voting on entire slate? No specifics stated in Bylaws.
  17. If a new chairman is elected on a small board, but the presiding chairman will still be a member of the board, when does the transition happen? Our election will most likely be during a regular meeting with further agenda items - some of which may be handled differently by the new officers.
  18. At today's meeting of an airport authority, the chair announced he was stepping down as of the next day. The authority's by-laws only define that elections of officers should take place at the annual meeting. The by-laws don't define whether the vote should be taken by roll-call or simple voice vote. Further, the by-laws don't make any reference to an "interim chair" position. Does RRNR address how resigned seats should be filled? Since there is no "interim chair" position defined in the by-laws, wouldn't the newly elected person be "the" chair until another election is held (either at the annual meeting or when the motion to do so is raised again)? Shouldn't the vote be taken by roll-call? Thanks for your assistance.
  19. Nominations for the nominating committee have already been taken from the floor and the slate finalized. But since then, a few nominees withdrew, and now there are less people on the ballot than the number required for the committee's composition, as required in the bylaws. Do we ask for additional nominations from the floor on the day of voting, or will the president appoint the additional person?
  20. Can an employee of a private club run for a position on the Board of Directors? It's not in the bylaws, but wouldn't it be a conflict of interest?
  21. Our nominating committee put forth 5 candidates for 4 open positions on the Board of Directors. The bylaws of the organization call for "A reasonable opportunity for all members to choose among the nominees", which has been interpreted to mean both mail-in and in-person balloting. After the period for mail-in balloting concluded but before the in-person balloting has started, one of the nominees has withdrawn her candidacy for personal reasons. Therefore we now have 4 candidates for 4 open positions. In the past the organization has used acclamation when the number of candidates and available positions are equal.The question now is can we move to election by acclamation since we now have 4 candidates for 4 positions or do we need to continue with in-person balloting since balloting has started? Thanks, Mike C.
  22. 1. Our organization has a two-step election procedure. In the first step the 7 members of the Board are elected. In the second step the four officers (President, VP, Treasurer, Secretary) are elected from among the 7 Board members. All of these 4 have signing authority. The ByLaws require secret ballot for the second step. Our ByLaw does not state that affairs are to be conducted according to RO. At the March 2015 AGM the Board was elected according to the ByLaws. Then, the Treasurer was elected by secret ballot from 2 candidates. The remaining 3 positions only had one candidate each. These were elected by acclamation. At a members' meeting in October 2015 the ByLaws were amended to make exception from the requirement of secret ballot in the case of uncontested candidacy in the Officers' election. My question is: what is the status of the 3 Officers elected by acclamation? They have been governing the organization and signing documents. RONR seems to say that a point of order can be raised at any time regarding this error, and also says that only the voting body can resolve the matter. If there is something to be remedied, what is it, and how to accomplish it? The next AGM is in March 2016. The relevant statute (Canada Non-for-profit Corporations Act, 139.) states: "An act of a director or an officer is valid despite an irregularity in their election or appointment or a defect in their qualification." Does this help/get us off the hook? 2. The recent ByLaw amendment exempts uncontested candidacy from secret ballot, but the Board intends to hold a vote (such as show of hands) rather than declare such a candidate by acclamation. If it should happen, that the candidacy of an uncontested candidate is rejected by the membership, where does that leave us? 3. The ByLaw states that the Chair of members meetings is the President, and in his absence the VP. Under the description of Offices it is repeated: "The President, when present, shall preside at all meetings of the BoD and of the members." At the March 2015 AGM the president invited a skilled professional and appointed her to chair the AGM. After the initial remarks of the president (who was present throughout), she was chairing the meeting. RONR states (p 453, 25-35) that this can be allowed, but it was neither voted on by the members nor were the rules suspended. Again, our ByLaw does not state that affairs are to be conducted according to RO. The Board have powers of delegation, but those are not spelled out in the ByLaw. My question is: Was this an acceptable procedure? If not, does this affect the validity of anything that was voted on at that meeting? Thank you!
  23. Our club's election by-law originally read, "If there are more candidates for director than there are positions, the election of directors shall be by secret ballot." It's been years since we have had more candidates than available board positions, and so candidates have been routinely elected by acclamation. In 2011, our club amended this by-law to read, "The election of directors shall be by secret ballot" (the first 11 words were eliminated). Despite this amendment, candidates continued to be elected by acclamation in 2012 and 2013 (no balloting took place). This doesn't seem right to me. Can election by acclamation still occur when such an explicit by-law calling for secret ballots exists? If not, what is the legal staus of the board currently in place?
  24. Let me explain the situation and then I will ask two questions at the end of my post. Officer elections are coming up and things have gotten contentious. Nominating Committee met and presented a slate with one name for each position. The sitting President was on the slate as the nominee for President next year, as is our custom. A nomination from the floor was made to run against the sitting President. While this is allowed in our bylaws, it has never been done before. According to our bylaws, nomination from the floor are made at the September meeting and the Election is at the October meeting. We do allow absentee voting. Our bylaws specifically state that nominations from the floor will only be accepted at the September meeting (which has already occurred). Immediately after nominations from the floor the campaigning from the additional nominee's team began, and it started pitting neighbor against neighbor. The sitting President stated via email to the membership that she was removing her name from the ballot in order to end the contention. Unfortunately that appears to have only emboldened the other candidate's team. As a result, many of the members are starting a campaign for the sitting President to again run against the new nominee so that members will have a choice. Sitting President is very willing. Our bylaws state that within 7 days of the nomination meeting, that the Nominating Committee Chair will send to the President the final ballot. That has been done, and the sitting President's name is not there as she had removed her name. Our bylaws also state that within seven days of the President receiving this information from the Nominating Committee Chair, that the President will announce th final ballot to the membership via email and posting on our website. This has not been done as it is not due yet. Questions: 1)Is there any way to add the sitting President's name back onto the ballot? Or is the only option as a write-in candidate? and 2) If the only option is for the sitting President to be a write-in candidate, is there any way to prepare the ballot or handle the vote and protect anonymity? For instance, everyone will know if I vote for the candidate on the ballot or the write in candidate based on my simply making a check or writing a name.
  25. Hi. Assume bylaws have no procedures for challenging an election result and only Robert's Rules of Order apply, Facts: An election is held and the winner is announced. Winner is sworn into office and begins exercising duties of office. A week later someone looks at Robert's Rules of Order and complains that the number of votes was not sufficient to have a winner. Question: What sections of Robert's Rules addresses the situation where once an officer begins exercising duties of office their election can no longer be challenged (too late). Or, is there an argument for continuing breach of rules in that someone did not get the number of votes (majority) at the election?
  • Create New...