Election of officers

[Guest Dinah W.]

Our organization is having a state meeting. The existing president will be presiding over the election, she said she would start at the bottom of the nominees for office and work up to president. This puts a problem with the members. We are a medium size organization but we have about 10-15 people who show up. Some of the people who are in office now, want to move up an office. If the nominations start at the lower offices, the people in the lower offices might get re-elected for that office and can't move up. So my question is should the election and nominations of officers start with president and work down or start at the lower level and work up?

[Robert B Fish]

If you don't like the procedure the president si suggesting, move to have another procedure. The president does not have the authority to REQUIRE that you follow that suggestion.

-Bob

[jstackpo]

RONR describes the nomination/election process on pp. 416 ff.

On 418 it says that nominations are called for in the order the offices are listed in the bylaws; the book doesn't state, in so many words, that elections are done in this order, but it is a strong inference that they would be.

And if you nominate then elect, office by office, (rather than listing all offices and candidates on a single sheet of paper/ballot) then they would be for sure.

[David A Foulkes]

Our organization is having a state meeting. The existing president will be presiding over the election, she said she would start at the bottom of the nominees for office and work up to president.

Maybe you could ask her (outside of a meeting context, perhaps) why she's doing it this way. And if she gives you some sort of quote about it being "the rules", you might ask for her to show that "rule." Maybe take her out for coffee in a public place, and offer to pay. Just a thought here. Never know what she might come up with.

[Rob Elsman]

RONR describes the nomination/election process on pp. 416 ff.

On 418 it says that nominations are called for in the order the offices are listed in the bylaws; the book doesn't state, in so many words, that elections are done in this order, but it is a strong inference that they would be.

And if you nominate then elect, office by office, (rather than listing all offices and candidates on a single sheet of paper/ballot) then they would be for sure.

If the procedure in RONR (10th ed.), p. 426, ll. 7-25, is followed, the elections will necessarily be held in the order that the officers are mentioned in the bylaws. Presumably, the same holds if the procedure in RONR (10th ed.), p. 425, l. 4, through p. 426, l. 6, is followed, unless a consolidated ballot is used.

[Gary Novosielski]

Our organization is having a state meeting. The existing president will be presiding over the election, she said she would start at the bottom of the nominees for office and work up to president. This puts a problem with the members. We are a medium size organization but we have about 10-15 people who show up. Some of the people who are in office now, want to move up an office. If the nominations start at the lower offices, the people in the lower offices might get re-elected for that office and can't move up. So my question is should the election and nominations of officers start with president and work down or start at the lower level and work up?

According to RONR, she must conduct the nominations in the order that the officers are listed in the bylaws, unless (a majority of) the assembly would rather have it done differently. but to suggest that she has the authority to change it unilaterally is absurd.