Guest Sam Posted October 31, 2011 at 04:48 PM Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 at 04:48 PM if bylaws are specific that nominations for officers are taken during the September and October meetings with elections held in November, can we reopen nominations if the president closed nominations at the end of the October meeting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 31, 2011 at 04:53 PM Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 at 04:53 PM RONR says "Sure, by majority vote". (Strictly, the president doesn't have the authority to close nominations all by himself, but if there was no objection to his high-handedness at the time, done is done.)The ballots should also have spaces for write-in votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted October 31, 2011 at 05:22 PM Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 at 05:22 PM RONR says "Sure, by majority vote". (Strictly, the president doesn't have the authority to close nominations all by himself, but if there was no objection to his high-handedness at the time, done is done.)The ballots should also have spaces for write-in votes.Well, I don't know if there is any impropriety implied in saying that the chair closed nominations, since the processes for closing the polls and closing nominations are so strikingly similar and RONR says of the former that it "is usually better to leave it to the chair to close the polls." Since the process for the latter is essentially the same, I would think it could be properly said that closing nominations should be left to the chair... provided he doesn't violate the rules, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted October 31, 2011 at 05:28 PM Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 at 05:28 PM RONR says "Sure, by majority vote". (Strictly, the president doesn't have the authority to close nominations all by himself, but if there was no objection to his high-handedness at the time, done is done.)The ballots should also have spaces for write-in votes.Why are we so sure that nominations can be reopened by majority vote in November if the bylaws specify that nominations for officers are taken during the September and October meetings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 31, 2011 at 05:54 PM Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 at 05:54 PM Assuming (do you think rashly-? - ask the questioner) that the questioner correctly summarized the content of his bylaws.I don't see how "specify" implies "exclusively" as "Wraith-o'-Dan" (boo!, for Halloween) seems to be implying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted October 31, 2011 at 06:02 PM Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 at 06:02 PM I don't see how "specify" implies "exclusively" as . . . Dan . . . seems to be implying.Wouldn't a two-thirds vote be required to suspend the bylaw that says nominations are accepted in September and October? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 31, 2011 at 06:52 PM Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 at 06:52 PM You can't suspend those bylaw provisions, but it is basically up to your association to interpret them as to the question of whether the floor can be opened for nominations in November.I can't be really sure without reading you bylaws - nor can anybody else here. See p. 588 ff for "how-tos" on interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted October 31, 2011 at 07:18 PM Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 at 07:18 PM You can't suspend those bylaw provisions, but it is basically up to your association to interpret them as to the question of whether the floor can be opened for nominations in November.I can't be really sure without reading you bylaws - nor can anybody else here. See p. 588 ff for "how-tos" on interpretation.A rule preventing nominations could be suspensible. I'm pretty sure Mr. Hoover's bylaws have nothing to do with the matter, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted October 31, 2011 at 07:45 PM Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 at 07:45 PM I'm pretty sure Mr. Hoover's bylaws have nothing to do with the matter, though.Indeed.(And that would be Mr. Guest). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 31, 2011 at 07:45 PM Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 at 07:45 PM A rule preventing nominations could be suspensible.I dunno -- I'd put that one smack in the middle of a gray area - p.17, ll. 15-18.Could be that the association deliberately adopted a bylaw provision (or thought they did) asserting "no floor nominations" after a certain time before the election meeting so as to preclude any surprise (un-vetted) nominations. That wouldn't be suspendable as it has nothing to do with "the orderly transaction of business in meetings".I can't say if Sam's group did so or not in spite of my prior assurances (they were how I'd interpret Sam's bylaws given what we know of them, but I'm not a member, &c.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted October 31, 2011 at 07:53 PM Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 at 07:53 PM it has nothing to do with "the orderly transaction of business in meetings".But isn't that where nominations take place? In meetings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.