Board Nominations without Quorum

[TraderFred]

At the last meeting for nominations, 2 Board positions remained open. A quorum was not present. The President was advised to take nominations anyway. Nominations were made, seconded and accepted for the two positions, one candidate each. The President closed nominations and no one objected to the nominations being taken without a quorum. The election was to held at the next weekly meeting.

On election night, a member of a clique opposed to one of the candidates convinced the President to nullify the 2 nominations, due to a lack of a quorum, and reopen them that night. From a political point they wanted to nominate their candidate. The President held elections for the other positions not affected by the disputed candidates.

He subsequently took nominations after the election for the other two positions. The opposing party nominated their candidate, and the original candidate also accepted the nomination.

We are bound by RONR. A few questions. Was it legitimate for the president to negate the two nominations on election night ? Granted a quorum wasn't present, when they were made but no objection was made. If the negation was not proper can it revert back to the original nominees?

[Robert B Fish]

In the absence of a quorum, you may not hold nominations for office. That action is null and void.

Even if it was not nullified, the members cold always vote to reopen nominations.

-Bob

[TraderFred]

In the absence of a quorum, you may not hold nominations for office. That action is null and void.

Even if it was not nullified, the members cold always vote to reopen nominations.

-Bob

Bob, Thank you for clarifying the matter.

TraderFred

[Tim Wynn]

We are bound by RONR. A few questions. Was it legitimate for the president to negate the two nominations on election night ? Granted a quorum wasn't present, when they were made but no objection was made. If the negation was not proper can it revert back to the original nominees?

It appears that no harm was done. Nominations don't require a second or approval.

Trying to block the new nominees appears to be a waste of time. If this "clique" has enough members to elect its candidate, I wouldn't call it a "clique." I'd call it a majority. If it doesn't have enough to elect, I don't see what all the fuss is about.

[Robert B Fish]

It appears that no harm was done. Nominations don't require a second or approval.

Trying to block the new nominees appears to be a waste of time. If this "clique" has enough members to elect its candidate, I wouldn't call it a "clique." I'd call it a majority. If it doesn't have enough to elect, I don't see what all the fuss is about.

However, if I understand the post, they take nominations at one meeting and hold the elections at the next. The problem was that the nominating meeting was inquorate. Therefore, even if they could accept nominations at that meeting, they could not close nominations and thereby exclude the others.

Did I understand your situation correctly?

-Bob

[Josh Martin]

Was it legitimate for the president to negate the two nominations on election night ?

Yes. The nominations were null and void, since they were made at an inquorate meeting. Of course, nothing prevents the members from nominating these individuals again (and it appears that happened). As noted, nominations may be reopened by majority vote anyway.

Granted a quorum wasn't present, when they were made but no objection was made.

Conducting business in the absence of a quorum constitutes a continuing breach, so it is an exception to the usual requirement that a Point of Order must be made at the time of the breach.