Guest Anne Posted March 28, 2011 at 06:01 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2011 at 06:01 PM Hi! We had a slate presented to our membership meeting on Tuesday, Mar 22. Then, on March 27, an email was sent out to the e-list including the name of someone newly nominated for a position that was previously vacant. My question is, once the slate is presented, is it possible to add someone like that, or do they instead need to run from the floor? and, does that change if the email was before the minimum 30 days notice as specified in the bylaws?Thanks!Anne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted March 28, 2011 at 06:18 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2011 at 06:18 PM Hi! We had a slate presented to our membership meeting on Tuesday, Mar 22. Then, on March 27, an email was sent out to the e-list including the name of someone newly nominated for a position that was previously vacant. My question is, once the slate is presented, is it possible to add someone like that, or do they instead need to run from the floor? and, does that change if the email was before the minimum 30 days notice as specified in the bylaws?Thanks!AnneThe nominating committee should nominate a person for each position. Did it?Once the nominating committee presents its report, it ceases to exist. Only if a nominee withdraws would the committee be revived to select another nominee. See RONR(10th ed.), p. 421.I don't know what you're talking about with the "30 days notice." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted March 28, 2011 at 06:20 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2011 at 06:20 PM If the Nominating Committee finds someone to run for a previously un-nominated position, and it is all done within some bylaw requirements, I say more power to them! Congratulate them; don't admonish them; they are doing a fine job! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert B Fish Posted March 28, 2011 at 06:22 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2011 at 06:22 PM I interpret what you said to mean that the nominating committee presented its report to the membership on March 22, indicating the person(s) they would nominate at the election, (to be held in April?). On March 27, the committee indicated they were amending their report to provide a nominee for a position that was previously vacant. No rule in RONR would prevent the nominating committee from amending their report prior to actually presenting it. However, if your bylaws provide specialized rules, e.g. that the report must be made a month ahead of the election, they those rules superscede RONR.-Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anne Posted March 28, 2011 at 08:10 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2011 at 08:10 PM I interpret what you said to mean that the nominating committee presented its report to the membership on March 22, indicating the person(s) they would nominate at the election, (to be held in April?). On March 27, the committee indicated they were amending their report to provide a nominee for a position that was previously vacant. No rule in RONR would prevent the nominating committee from amending their report prior to actually presenting it. However, if your bylaws provide specialized rules, e.g. that the report must be made a month ahead of the election, they those rules superscede RONR.-BobThank you Tim, JD and Robert. JD, I am not admonishing anyone. It is however a fact that the person listed in the slate has an advantage over anyone running from the floor, and I want to make sure this is done fairly. Our bylaws state that the slate must be presented to the membership at least 15 days before the election.Robert, you are correct, a slate was presented with two vacancies. Then a modified slate was presented, with one of the vacancies filled. Based on what you three wrote, it seems this is in keeping with RONR.Thank you all again so very much for your help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted March 28, 2011 at 08:36 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2011 at 08:36 PM It is however a fact that the person listed in the slate has an advantage over anyone running from the floor . . .Firstly, you would do well not to refer to the report (the selections) of the nominating committee as a "slate".Secondly, depending on the politics of the particular organization, being selected by the nominating committee (i.e. "the powers that be") could actually be a disadvantage. I would think incumbency, for example, confers a greater advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted March 28, 2011 at 08:37 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2011 at 08:37 PM It is however a fact that the person listed in the slate has an advantage over anyone running from the floor, and I want to make sure this is done fairly. That might be true most of the time but I can imagine there being a clique in the nominating committee and with a few other members who the nominating committee nominates for the office. The Membership may overall not approve of the way that the clique is doing business and anyone who was nominated from the floor would have an advantage over the committee's nominees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anne Posted March 28, 2011 at 09:01 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2011 at 09:01 PM That might be true most of the time but I can imagine there being a clique in the nominating committee and with a few other members who the nominating committee nominates for the office. The Membership may overall not approve of the way that the clique is doing business and anyone who was nominated from the floor would have an advantage over the committee's nominees.Hi H. Wm. and Chris.Thanks so much for your help. You are right, in that I was generalizing our situation inappropriately. I see your point, but for our group, being on the list of nominees is an advantage. And, no, in case you are wondering, I am not planning to run from the floor, nor am I supporting an alternate candidate. I also am sorry if using the word slate is considered bad form - it is what our organization calls it, so I am just using their terminology. Thanks again for your help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert B Fish Posted March 28, 2011 at 09:07 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2011 at 09:07 PM Our bylaws state that the slate must be presented to the membership at least 15 days before the election.The nominating committee would be in violation of the bylaws if they added names to their report during the period 15 days before the election.-Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anne Posted March 28, 2011 at 09:17 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2011 at 09:17 PM The nominating committee would be in violation of the bylaws if they added names to their report during the period 15 days before the election.-BobSince they did it before that window, then it is ok! Thanks so much - you all are an invaluable resource! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.