Officers-Elect and Backing Out

[Guest Guest1234]

Our organization elects and intalls six new officers every year. This year there were ten names on the ballot and seven were elected. Prior to installation one off the officers-elect decided not to serve. Is there a whole new election for the needed sixth officer, or do we default to the person that received the next highest number of votes at the original election?

[Chris Harrison]

The Officer-elect has no office to resign from until he takes the office (whether he takes office upon election and installation is merely a formality or if he actually takes office upon installation is something your bylaws should answer). As soon as he takes office he can offer his resignation (and the assembly can choose whether to accept the resignation) and if the resignation is accepted the vacancy filling provision in the bylaws would kick in.

Also, while my math may be off it seems that you have more people elected (7) than offices to fill (6).

[Guest Guest]

Thanks for the answer. You're right, it's a typo. Six needed, six elected.

Now one of them refuses to take office. So, is at a whole new election?

[Chris Harrison]

Now one of them refuses to take office. So, is at a whole new election?

You would follow whatever procedures your bylaws have for filling a vacancy. If they are silent on the issue whatever body elected the officer would have to hold an election to fill the vacancy (and previous notice of the election would be required).

[Guest Guest]

That's what i thought. I appreciate your answer.

[Gary Novosielski]

The Officer-elect has no office to resign from until he takes the office (whether he takes office upon election and installation is merely a formality or if he actually takes office upon installation is something your bylaws should answer). As soon as he takes office he can offer his resignation (and the assembly can choose whether to accept the resignation) and if the resignation is accepted the vacancy filling provision in the bylaws would kick in.

I don't see why he couldn't resign (ask to be excused from a duty) in advance of beginning that duty. The election is complete, and his resignation will create a vacancy.

One thing that does NOT happen is handing the office to the next best vote-getter. The number two person could not possibly have received a majority vote, so that's not an option at all.

Under some circumstances, the authority charged with filling vacancies might be able to appoint the runner-up, but it's not something that would happen automatically. The only automatic succession is vice-president-to-president.

[Rev Ed]

As the Officer has not taken office yet, you have an incomplete election. You need to hold another meeting to elect the remaining position.

[Guest Edgar]

The election is complete, and his resignation will create a vacancy.

As the Officer has not taken office yet, you have an incomplete election.

The election, as Mr. Novosielski said, is complete. It was completed when the elected candidate initially accepted the office. He can't "uncomplete" it by backing out now.

[Bruce Lages]

I seem to recall that this issue - where a newly elected officer declines to serve after initially accepting the position but before his term of office actually begins - has been raised before in this forum. It brings up a somewhat gray area in applying the rules of RONR, since it differs from the book's default position of an electee taking office immediately upon completion of the election.

If I remember the previous responses correctly, there is technically no vacancy since the previous office holder is still in office, so that the vacancy-filling provisions will not apply until the new term of office actually begins. Doesn't the organization have the choice of holding a new election, following the provisions of the bylaws and if time permits, for just the office affected, or waiting until the new term of office begins (if the time difference is not excessive) and then applying their vacancy-filling procedures? Which choice to make might be important since the vacancy-filling procedures may not be the same as those for holding another election.

Gary has also added a third possibility of applying the vacancy-filling procedures in advance of the actual date of taking office.

[Josh Martin]

I don't see why he couldn't resign (ask to be excused from a duty) in advance of beginning that duty. The election is complete, and his resignation will create a vacancy.

I concur. I see no reason that the resignation, the acceptance of the resignation, and the filling of the vacancy cannot occur prior to the "start date" of the position.

As the Officer has not taken office yet, you have an incomplete election. You need to hold another meeting to elect the remaining position.

I disagree. See RONR, 11th ed., pg. 444, lines 18-27. While RONR does state that the organization may specify a later time for an officer-elect to take office (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 444, lines 29-30), the text does not suggest that this affects the time at which an election becomes complete.

If I remember the previous responses correctly, there is technically no vacancy since the previous office holder is still in office, so that the vacancy-filling provisions will not apply until the new term of office actually begins.

There will be no vacancy until the term begins, but I see no reason why this prevents the vacancy-filling provisions from being applied. The rules pertaining to Request to Be Excused from a Duty state that a member who has accepted an office should submit his resignation - it does not suggest that he must actually yet have taken the office he is resigning from. (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 291, lines 1-3) Likewise, the rules for that motion suggest that a vacancy is created by the acceptance of a resignation, and nothing suggests that the assembly must wait until the vacancy actually occurs to fill it. (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 291, lines 14-23)

A similar situation would be one in which an assembly accepts a resignation of a member who is already in a position with a proviso that the resignation shall not be effective until a certain date (presumably at the request of the member). The vacancy would be created by the acceptance of the resignation, but would not actually exist until the resignation became effective. In my opinion, the vacancy could be filled prior to the effective date of the resignation, provided that any required notice was given.

Doesn't the organization have the choice of holding a new election, following the provisions of the bylaws and if time permits, for just the office affected, or waiting until the new term of office begins (if the time difference is not excessive) and then applying their vacancy-filling procedures?

No. It is not an incomplete election. See RONR, 11th ed., pg. 444, lines 18-27, 29-30. It is a vacancy and the organization must follow those procedures, although it is not required to wait until the term of office begins.