joneuman Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:29 PM Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:29 PM Our Bylaws provide officers serve 1 year OR until successor is elected, so a motion to rescind the election is allowed. The Bylaws do not provide a method for filling a vacancy in the case of the president.My question is:RONR p. 643, l-2 says the election "of the officer in question can be rescinded and a successor can thereafter be elected for the remainder of the term." Does not the removal of the officer then create a vacancy that would be filled according to RONR p,. 567, 19-22 which states "If the bylaws are silent as to the method of filling a vacancy in the specific case of the presidency, the vice president or first vice president automatically becomes presdident for the remainder of the term"? Or does the language from 643 control the procedure?Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:33 PM Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:33 PM Our Bylaws provide officers serve 1 year OR until successor is elected, so a motion to rescind the election is allowed. The Bylaws do not provide a method for filling a vacancy in the case of the president.My question is:RONR p. 643, l-2 says the election "of the officer in question can be rescinded and a successor can thereafter be elected for the remainder of the term." Does not the removal of the officer then create a vacancy that would be filled according to RONR p,. 567, 19-22 which states "If the bylaws are silent as to the method of filling a vacancy in the specific case of the presidency, the vice president or first vice president automatically becomes presdident for the remainder of the term"? Or does the language from 643 control the procedure?Thanks.Page 557 controls in the case of the removal of the president from office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:39 PM Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:39 PM The Bylaws do not provide a method for filling a vacancy in the case of the president.Probably because the vice-president becomes the president in that case. Then you have a vacancy in the office of vice-president (which should be filled ASAP). Ideally, you'll never have a vacancy in the important office of president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:40 PM Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:40 PM Page 557 controls in the case of the removal of the president from office.I agree. I'd say RONR is quite clear on this, in that unless the bylaws explicitly provide for other procedures, once the president's office becomes vacant the vice-president automatically and immediately ascends. It is the only office that has such a qualification, and all others are dealt with either by bylaw provision for filling vacancies or by special election.But Rob --- could the motion to rescind the election of the president also include in some manner language that fills that vacancy with another candidate, and without the VP taking the office? Or would that approach be out of order? Just a thought..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:42 PM Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:42 PM could the motion to rescind the election of the president also include in some manner language that fills that vacancy with another candidate, and without the VP taking the office?What vacancy? The succession is instantaneous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joneuman Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:43 PM Author Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:43 PM One further question then ... the bylaws do provide "a vacancy occurring in any office shall be filled for the unexpired term by a person elected by a majority vote of the executive board." I know that this does not apply to the president (I asked that question a while back of this board), but then if p. 557 controls when you move to rescind the election of the president, and the first VP immediately takes over, we would then never have a case where p. 643 would control how an officer is replaced. Correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:44 PM Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:44 PM What I'm thinking is something like:"I move to rescind the 2010 election to the office of the president with the proviso that Mr. Not-The-VP be named the new president." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:56 PM Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 at 06:56 PM One further question then ... the bylaws do provide "a vacancy occurring in any office shall be filled for the unexpired term by a person elected by a majority vote of the executive board." I know that this does not apply to the president (I asked that question a while back of this board), but then if p. 557 controls when you move to rescind the election of the president, and the first VP immediately takes over, we would then never have a case where p. 643 would control how an officer is replaced. Correct?A bylaw will control over any conflicting rule in RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted February 21, 2011 at 08:27 PM Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 at 08:27 PM One further question then ... the bylaws do provide "a vacancy occurring in any office shall be filled for the unexpired term by a person elected by a majority vote of the executive board." I know that this does not apply to the president (I asked that question a while back of this board), but then if p. 557 controls when you move to rescind the election of the president, and the first VP immediately takes over, we would then never have a case where p. 643 would control how an officer is replaced. Correct? The section I think you're referring to begins with "Except as the bylaws may provide otherwise..."So it would be applicable in the absence of any bylaw to the contrary. (Which is why I'm confused as to your assertion that your bylaws don't apply to the removal of president.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted February 21, 2011 at 08:32 PM Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 at 08:32 PM What I'm thinking is something like:"I move to rescind the 2010 election to the office of the president with the proviso that Mr. Not-The-VP be named the new president."wouldn't it be out of order inasmuch as it conflicts with the rules of the assembly (as adopted per RONR as the parliamentary authority)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted February 21, 2011 at 11:06 PM Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 at 11:06 PM One further question then ... the bylaws do provide "a vacancy occurring in any office shall be filled for the unexpired term by a person elected by a majority vote of the executive board." I know that this does not apply to the president (I asked that question a while back of this board), but then if p. 557 controls when you move to rescind the election of the president, and the first VP immediately takes over, we would then never have a case where p. 643 would control how an officer is replaced. Correct?Mostly correct. The pg. 643 citation would be controlling if the President was removed while all the Vice President positions were vacant, but that should be a rare occurrence. The section I think you're referring to begins with "Except as the bylaws may provide otherwise..."So it would be applicable in the absence of any bylaw to the contrary. (Which is why I'm confused as to your assertion that your bylaws don't apply to the removal of president.)A general clause is not sufficient to override the rule that the Vice President succeeds to the office of President. The Bylaws must have a clause referring specifically to the President in order to override the rule of RONR, 10th ed., pg. 557, lines 19-26.wouldn't it be out of order inasmuch as it conflicts with the rules of the assembly (as adopted per RONR as the parliamentary authority)?Exactly so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted February 21, 2011 at 11:17 PM Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 at 11:17 PM A general clause is not sufficient to override the rule that the Vice President succeeds to the office of President. The Bylaws must have a clause referring specifically to the President in order to override the rule of RONR, 10th ed., pg. 557, lines 19-26.Thank you, Josh! I got it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted February 22, 2011 at 08:14 PM Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 at 08:14 PM One further question then ... the bylaws do provide "a vacancy occurring in any office shall be filled for the unexpired term by a person elected by a majority vote of the executive board." I know that this does not apply to the president (I asked that question a while back of this board), but then if p. 557 controls when you move to rescind the election of the president, and the first VP immediately takes over, we would then never have a case where p. 643 would control how an officer is replaced. Correct?Well, no. Page 643 would apply to all officers except the president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.