Partial Term OUT of Office

[jstackpo]

We all know that if one serves more than half a term in office that counts as a "full term" as far as any term limitations in the bylaws goes. RONR, p. 557

But what about the inverse of that?

In particular, many bylaws have a requirement that one must be out of office for a term (after having served the full complement of a term limited time in office) before being eligible to serve in that office again. Suppose someone, Doris say, has gone out of office (in a normal end-of-term(s) situation) and has been out of that office for more than half the term (while someone else is serving, of course). But that "someone else" has just resigned, creating a vacancy. Can Doris be appointed to fill the vacancy? Doris has been out of office for "more than half a term", but not a full term. Does that "more than half term" count as a full term in this situation?

(I know, I know - "The association interprets it's own bylaws" and all that, but since RONR is explicit about a partial term IN office, should not the same rule apply for a partial term OUT of office?)

[hmtcastle]

since RONR is explicit about a partial term IN office, should not the same rule apply for a partial term OUT of office?)

Whether or not it should, I don't think it does.

By stating that more than half a term in office counts as a full terms (for purposes of term limits only), RONR is "erring" on the side of turnover (the purpose of term limits). By extending that principle to more than half a term out of office, you'd be "erring" on the other side.

[jstackpo]

Well, the requirement that one has to stay out of office for a set length of time is just as much a limitation on a right (to serve in office, in this case) as is a term limit itself. So if the limitation is relaxed in one situation - time serving in office - why should it not be relaxed in the other - time serving out of office?

[tctheatc]

In particular, many bylaws have a requirement that one must be out of office for a term (after having served the full complement of a term limited time in office) before being eligible to serve in that office again. Suppose someone, Doris say, has gone out of office (in a normal end-of-term(s) situation) and has been out of that office for more than half the term (while someone else is serving, of course). But that "someone else" has just resigned, creating a vacancy. Can Doris be appointed to fill the vacancy?

I used to be affiliated with a church where, in this case, Doris would go back in that slot, but not as Doris! No, sir, Doris would actually be the person who resigned, (let's call her Mabel)! So Doris would finish Mabel's term, and everyone would say Doris is not violating the rule of being off the committee for a year, because she's on there as Mabel, not as Doris. I kid you not.

[George Mervosh]

John, also consider posting this question on Yahoo, in case it disappears from here.

[hmtcastle]

So if the limitation is relaxed in one situation - time serving in office - why should it not be relaxed in the other - time serving out of office?

Again, whether it should or not is not a question that can be objectively answered. All I'm suggesting is that, if the goal of term limits to to increase turnover in office, one way to do it is to say that serving more than half a term counts as serving a full term. In other words, you "round up" the time in office. You could just as well establish a rule that says that nothing short of a full term counts as a full term (though you might end up with resignations a day before the term expires).

Similarly, you can say that serving more than half a term out of office does not count as being out of office for a full term. In other words, no rounding. The idea being to maximize, not minimize, the time out of office. Since the goal is new faces, not old ones.

Finally, the half-term-in-office rule is not a relaxation of term limits, it's a strengthening of them.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

...

In particular, many bylaws have a requirement that one must be out of office for a term (after having served the full complement of a term limited time in office) before being eligible to serve in that office again.

Suppose someone, Doris say, has gone out of office (in a normal end-of-term(s) situation) and has been out of that office for more than half the term (while someone else is serving, of course).

But that "someone else" has just resigned, creating a vacancy.

Can Doris be appointed to fill the vacancy?

Doris has been out of office for "more than half a term", but not a full term.

Does that "more than half term" count as a full term in this situation?

The Book is sneaky, in that it does not commit itself to anything beyond the act of "filling vacancies."

See page 432.

In filling vacancies for unexpired terms, an officer who has served more than half a term in

an office is considered to have served a full term.

If what you are doing is a normal election cycle, then page 432 will not apply, as page 432 explicitly limits its counting technique to "filling vacancies" only.

Once the normal election cycle has rolled around, you cannot lean on page 432.

That is, you cannot assert (for example) "Col. Mustard has served more than half a term. So Col. Mustard has not been out of office long enough to be elected at our Annual General Meeting."

Can Doris be appointed to fill the vacancy?

Page 432 will apply to Doris, since this is not the normal election cycle, but the act of "filling a vacancy."

[Josh Martin]

(I know, I know - "The association interprets it's own bylaws" and all that, but since RONR is explicit about a partial term IN office, should not the same rule apply for a partial term OUT of office?)

It is ultimately up to the organization to interpret its own Bylaws, although I think one could make a persuasive argument that the principle on pg. 557 applies to this situation as well.