Guest karen Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:39 AM Report Share Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:39 AM Our annual meeting is coming up.. the Constitution and Bylaws allows say the nominees must win by a majority vote.If the Const does not call for the Secretary to move for the election of Offices that are uncontested can the Sec do so anyway?What happens if there is not a majority vote at the call for electing the uncontested slate?What happens if each office is voted for and one uncontested nominee does not receive a majority of the vote?TIA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:43 AM Report Share Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:43 AM Our annual meeting is coming up.. the Constitution and Bylaws allows say the nominees must win by a majority vote.If the Const does not call for the Secretary to move for the election of Offices that are uncontested can the Sec do so anyway?What happens if there is not a majority vote at the call for electing the uncontested slate?What happens if each office is voted for and one uncontested nominee does not receive a majority of the vote?If your bylaws do not require a ballot vote, the chair can declare a sole nominee elected "by acclamation". The secretary has nothing to do with it.But you don't elect a "slate". You elect individual candidates to individual offices.And there is no way for an uncontested candidate to fail to receive a majority of the votes since, if he's uncontested, all the votes will be for him. If you want a contest, nominate someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert B Fish Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:46 AM Report Share Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:46 AM A parliamentarian should make a review of all the aspects of yoru bylaws pretaining to the elections to be sure, especially any provisions for holding a ballot vote.However, as far as RONR goes, for uncontested races, the chairman can either hold a voice vote or simply declare that the unopposed candidate has been elected.The only way you have to defeat an unopposed candidate is to run someone against him/her. Think nomination from the floor or write-in vote on the ballot.See Official Interpretation 2006-5-Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:47 AM Report Share Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:47 AM If the Const does not call for the Secretary to move for the election of Offices that are uncontested can the Sec do so anyway?If the bylaws do not require the election to be by BALLOT, when there is only one nominee the chair can declare the nominee elected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest karen Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:56 AM Report Share Posted April 27, 2011 at 12:56 AM If the bylaws do not require the election to be by BALLOT, when there is only one nominee the chair can declare the nominee elected.I was incorrect.. the Const does state:a. In the event any office has but one nominee, the chairman may request a motion from the assembly to declare that person elected unanimously. If such a motion is made, seconded and passed, by a majority of the assembly, the chairman shall declare that person duly elected and the Secretary shall record same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted April 27, 2011 at 01:00 AM Report Share Posted April 27, 2011 at 01:00 AM I was incorrect.. the Const does state:a. In the event any office has but one nominee, the chairman may request a motion from the assembly to declare that person elected unanimously. If such a motion is made, seconded and passed, by a majority of the assembly, the chairman shall declare that person duly elected and the Secretary shall record same.Based on that excerpt, I'm confident that I could reduce the size of your bylaws by 75% while incorporating three times as many useful rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted April 27, 2011 at 05:42 PM Report Share Posted April 27, 2011 at 05:42 PM I was incorrect.. the Const does state:a. In the event any office has but one nominee, the chairman may request a motion from the assembly to declare that person elected unanimously. If such a motion is made, seconded and passed, by a majority of the assembly, the chairman shall declare that person duly elected and the Secretary shall record same.Well, if the motion fails, the chair should probably ask if there is a motion to reopen nominations (or a motion to take the vote by ballot), as there is no point in defeating the motion unless people have someone else in mind. Then have a second round of voting. The assembly ultimately must elect someone for the officer position.In the long run, that rule should either be amended or removed entirely. If your Bylaws require a ballot vote, then the point of such a provision was likely to provide an exception for uncontested races. If that's the case, go with "In the event any office has only one nominee, the chairman may declare the nominee elected by acclamation." If your Bylaws do not require a ballot vote, the rule is completely pointless and should be removed in its entirety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sangamonese Posted May 3, 2011 at 05:52 PM Report Share Posted May 3, 2011 at 05:52 PM Based on that excerpt, I'm confident that I could reduce the size of your bylaws by 75% while incorporating three times as many useful rules. I'm sure you could...that doesn't help me with this problem...btw, I found my login so don't have to sign in as a guest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sangamonese Posted May 3, 2011 at 05:56 PM Report Share Posted May 3, 2011 at 05:56 PM Well, if the motion fails, the chair should probably ask if there is a motion to reopen nominations (or a motion to take the vote by ballot), as there is no point in defeating the motion unless people have someone else in mind. Then have a second round of voting. The assembly ultimately must elect someone for the officer position.In the long run, that rule should either be amended or removed entirely. If your Bylaws require a ballot vote, then the point of such a provision was likely to provide an exception for uncontested races. If that's the case, go with "In the event any office has only one nominee, the chairman may declare the nominee elected by acclamation." If your Bylaws do not require a ballot vote, the rule is completely pointless and should be removed in its entirety.our Constitution explicitly states that nominations from the floor may only be made at the April meeting, so how can nominations be reopened?The contested offices are voted on by Ballot...this concerns the slate of uncontested offices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted May 3, 2011 at 06:09 PM Report Share Posted May 3, 2011 at 06:09 PM our Constitution explicitly states that nominations from the floor may only be made at the April meeting, so how can nominations be reopened?Such a rule is in the nature of a rule of order and could be suspended by a 2/3 vote.The contested offices are voted on by Ballot...this concerns the slate of uncontested offices.Yes, but it is in order to vote on the uncontested offices by ballot as well. The assembly can order this by majority vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sangamonese Posted May 3, 2011 at 06:13 PM Report Share Posted May 3, 2011 at 06:13 PM Such a rule is in the nature of a rule of order and could be suspended by a 2/3 vote.Yes, but it is in order to vote on the uncontested offices by ballot as well. The assembly can order this by majority vote.thanks, I didn't know that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted May 4, 2011 at 01:12 AM Report Share Posted May 4, 2011 at 01:12 AM thanks, I didn't know thatSee RONR(10th ed.), p. 17, l. 22-24. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.