Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

motion to amend nominating committee report/slate


Guest Guest_JD

Recommended Posts

Guest Guest_JD

The nominating committee is nominating 12 people to fill 15 council member positions on a council (not officers). The committee is unable to find enough people willing to serve -- so this will leave 3 vacancies. It is the custom of this assembly to vote the nominating committee slate by acclamation. But this year, some members wish to vote by ballot in order to allow the assembly to vote specifically on ONE of the nominees.

Can a member move vote by ballot for only ONE nominee on the slate (leaving the remaining slate to be voted by acclamation)? Or, must the motion be to vote ALL nominations by ballot?

Or, should a member of the nominating committee move to amend the nominating committee report to remove this ONE name from the slate, so that person can be voted upon by ballot?

RONR p. 433-36 says that each vote is per office -- but in his case, is is not for position of officer, it is for position of council member. So is each council member position considered a separate "office?"

Link to post
Share on other sites

To start with, there are some who would say that voting on more than one position at a time is improper on the face of it. (I'm not one of them, but they are not to mess with. They have many teeth. They keep them in their mouths, for ready access.)

I (and others, some of whom agree with me on this) would say that it's unobjectionable to vote on the positions en bloc (Frenchy-type term) (RONR, 11th Edition, around p. 110, maybe lines 22 - 29 or thereabouts). If that is the appropriate citation, then of course any one member can require a separate vote on any of the positions. And of course the assembly can choose (by a majority vote) to elect by ballot. But I don't think anyone other than the nominating committee can touch its report (but why bother?).

If your council is close enough to a board of directors, then the council members should be classed as officers, if you'll believe what it says around p. 572, maybe line 19.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The nominating committee is nominating 12 people to fill 15 council member positions on a council (not officers). The committee is unable to find enough people willing to serve -- so this will leave 3 vacancies. It is the custom of this assembly to vote the nominating committee slate by acclamation. But this year, some members wish to vote by ballot in order to allow the assembly to vote specifically on ONE of the nominees.

Can a member move vote by ballot for only ONE nominee on the slate (leaving the remaining slate to be voted by acclamation)? Or, must the motion be to vote ALL nominations by ballot?

Or, should a member of the nominating committee move to amend the nominating committee report to remove this ONE name from the slate, so that person can be voted upon by ballot?

RONR p. 433-36 says that each vote is per office -- but in his case, is is not for position of officer, it is for position of council member. So is each council member position considered a separate "office?"

If you have 15 council positions, then they are voted on all at once, as the decision is to elect 15 councillors. If you are required to have 15 and not, say, "between 12 and 15", then you must have 15. Any fewer than 15 is an incomplete election. Moreover, in light of this, if you have fewer than 15 nominees, then the only way to object to an acclamation is to offer an alternate nomination, as if 15 are required, then the only way to not elect the 15 nominees is to offer an alternate nomination; it is not within your rules to elect 14 or fewer.

Additionally, unless your bylaws say so, no member has the individual right to demand a ballot election, but if one is to be held, then it is to be held for all 15 spots, and each member is allowed to vote for up to 15 nominees on each ballot. Additionally, if your bylaws require election by ballot, then this rule is not suspendable or avoidable in any fashion; the only valid election is one taken by ballot. If your bylaw does not relax this in the case of an acclamation, then you must hold a ballot regardless of the number of nomination.

See RONR §46, especially pp. 438-442.

Link to post
Share on other sites

(SCSH, you figure they're interchangeable like faceless cogs or marbles or Rachmaninoff fans?)

That's the impression I'm getting.

If they are not interchangeable positions, then disregard the parts that imply you vote on them all at once. The rest is still mostly correct though, especially the bits about you having to fill every seat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This question seems to be about declaring candidates elected by acclamation. If your bylaws require a ballot vote, you can't depart from that to elect by acclamation. If not, still any member could, through nomination, block any possibility of electing by acclamation, whether or not the positions are identical.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But this year, some members wish to vote by ballot in order to allow the assembly to vote specifically on ONE of the nominees.

Do you mean that, this year, some members actually want to vote for someone who wasn't selected by the nominating committee? Because the only way you can "vote on one nominee" if you don't want to vote for him is to vote for someone else.

All you have to do is nominate someone else. Then persuade a majority of the assembly to conduct the vote by ballot (if that's not already required with more than one nominee for a position).

Link to post
Share on other sites

This question seems to be about declaring candidates elected by acclamation. If your bylaws require a ballot vote, you can't depart from that to elect by acclamation. If not, still any member could, through nomination, block any possibility of electing by acclamation, whether or not the positions are identical.

I don't think this last sentence is correct if the number of persons nominated are less than the number of positions to be filled (RONR, 11th ed., p. 432, ll. 13-14)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think this last sentence is correct if the number of persons nominated are less than the number of positions to be filled (RONR, 11th ed., p. 432, ll. 13-14)

If you read "through nomination" to include mulitple nominations, as I intended, I believe that you'll find the sentence bullet-proof. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read "through nomination" to include mulitple nominations, as I intended, I believe that you'll find the sentence bullet-proof. ;)

Wait, your reference, in this context, seems to imply that a member could not make 12 nominations when 12 positions are to be filled. I don't see where that's true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...