Special Meeting - One Agenda Item

[Traditionalist]

A special meeting is convened for the sole purpose of voting on a committee recommendation with regard to the hiring of an Executive Director. The ballot contains only the name of the person recommended by the committee.

Must the Chair entertain a motion to amend?

If the recommendation is defeated, may the Chair refuse to entertain a new motion placing another name in nomination?

[Robert B Fish]

The motion "That Joe Jones be hired as XD" can be amended and that amendment would be within the scope for the meeting. However, there are limits. You could not hire co-directors, change the job, decide to redecorate the XD's office, etc as that's outside the scope of the special meeting. You could not change any of the provisions in the bylaws related to this (or any other) office.

If the chairman rules your motion to amend out of order, he/she will have to state the reasons for doing so and you can appeal the ruling. A majority vote is required to overturn the chairman's ruling.

-Bob

[Traditionalist]

Thank you. Would you mind providing a citation for your reply?

[Josh Martin]

The motion "That Joe Jones be hired as XD" can be amended and that amendment would be within the scope for the meeting. However, there are limits. You could not hire co-directors, change the job, decide to redecorate the XD's office, etc as that's outside the scope of the special meeting. You could not change any of the provisions in the bylaws related to this (or any other) office.

If the chairman rules your motion to amend out of order, he/she will have to state the reasons for doing so and you can appeal the ruling. A majority vote is required to overturn the chairman's ruling.

I agree with your answer, but I would avoid the nomenclature of "scope of the meeting" for describing whether an amendment is in order, since this is likely to get people to confuse it with the topic of "scope of notice" for motions which require previous notice. While it is certainly true that an amendment which is not germane to the motion is not in order, that is true at any meeting (although only in a special meeting would violating this rule cause a continuing breach).

Thank you. Would you mind providing a citation for your reply?

Amendments in order at a special meeting: RONR, 11th ed., pg. 93, lines 5-8

Amendments must be germane: RONR, 11th ed., pg. 131, lines 15-18; pgs. 136-138

State reason for ruling: RONR, 11th ed., pg. 253, lines 25-27

Appeal in order: RONR, 11th ed., pg. 255, lines 28-29

Appeal - majority: RONR, 11th ed., pg. 258, lines 14-16

[Trina]

A special meeting is convened for the sole purpose of voting on a committee recommendation with regard to the hiring of an Executive Director. The ballot contains only the name of the person recommended by the committee.

Must the Chair entertain a motion to amend?

If the recommendation is defeated, may the Chair refuse to entertain a new motion placing another name in nomination?

It is not proper to require members to vote 'yes' or 'no' on the name of a single candidate on a ballot. A ballot implies an election, and the only way vote against one person is to vote for someone else. Thus, if a ballot was actually used, it must be possible to nominate other candidates.

Perhaps it was simply presented as motion 'that Joe Jones be hired as executive director' -- as Mr. Fish suggested?

I'm not disagreeing with the previous posters; just pointing out the oddness (and possible consequences) of structuring this as an election.

[Josh Martin]

A ballot implies an election, and the only way vote against one person is to vote for someone else. Thus, if a ballot was actually used, it must be possible to nominate other candidates.

Perhaps it was simply presented as motion 'that Joe Jones be hired as executive director' -- as Mr. Fish suggested?

I'm not disagreeing with the previous posters; just pointing out the oddness (and possible consequences) of structuring this as an election.

A ballot vote does not necessarily imply an election. It is entirely in order to vote by ballot on a motion. I suspect that this is, indeed, a motion "That Joe Jones be hired as an executive director."

[Trina]

A special meeting is convened for the sole purpose of voting on a committee recommendation with regard to the hiring of an Executive Director. The ballot contains only the name of the person recommended by the committee.

...

If the recommendation is defeated, may the Chair refuse to entertain a new motion placing another name in nomination?

A ballot vote does not necessarily imply an election. It is entirely in order to vote by ballot on a motion. I suspect that this is, indeed, a motion "That Joe Jones be hired as an executive director."

Of course, any motion may be voted on by ballot. However, the bolded language in the original post made me wonder if the members were presented with an election ballot (or pseudo-election ballot, since only a single 'nominee' was permitted).

[Rhibran]

Just so I understand this conversation,

In this scenario, the motion "to hire Mr. Jones as Executive Director" requires a vote. (vote, because it was a motion)

However, if it were an election, and he would be unopposed, it would not require voting. (no vote, unopposed election)

[Guest Edgar]

However, if it were an election, and he would be unopposed, it would not require voting. (no vote, unopposed election)

Unless the bylaws required a ballot vote for elections (which many bylaws, including the sample bylaws in RONR's 10th edition, do).

[Rhibran]

Thanks.