Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'election of officers'.
Our Condo Association has annual elections, this year 3 of the officers are up for re-election, one of which is the President. Luckily we have a very active and engaged membership of the 232 owners. For those that cannot attend the meeting we allow them to appoint a proxy. On behalf of the Board the President sent out the notice of the annual meeting and attached a blank proxy apppointing himself as the proxy. He did indicate they could cross his name out and insert any member that would be present at the meeting. Is this legal? I also question the ethics. Feedback please.
Hi everyone, Our by-laws state that the nomination for Officers will be conducted at an October meeting, the election then conducted and the results read at the December meeting. Due to some financial ambiguity, it doesn't seem like we have the monies to fund both an election and conduct the day-to-day activities of the organization, and it seems like there might have been some issue with the finances that are still being sorted out. A general member made a motion to postpone the election to a later meeting (picked a definite date), in order to get the finances of the organization in order and hopefully the current officers can come to some sort of understanding where a costly election will not be necessary (i.e., everyone running unopposed, which is what has happened in the past). This was seconded and voted on by a majority of members present at the meeting. Now, one of the officers is saying that he doesn't believe that motion was valid. However, according to RR Art V Sec 31, it states that, "A matter that is required by the by-laws to be attended to at a specified time or meeting as the election of officers cannot, in advance, be postponed to another time or meeting, but when that specified time or meeting arrives the assembly may postpone it to an adjourned meeting." So it seems like even though the by-laws say the nominations take place during a certain meeting, RR states that as long as the motion is made at the meeting itself and not beforehand, a motion to postpone is valid. Am I interpreting this correctly? Thanks!