sammy Posted December 10, 2011 at 08:03 PM Report Share Posted December 10, 2011 at 08:03 PM in our organization we have small chapters, whinc all use the same bylaws, our bylaws stat that our officers are as follows, president, ist vice president, and a senond vice president, we have a chapter that says that they have two co presidents, why would you have tow acting presidents when you have a ist and second vice presidents? I feel that this is in violation of our bylaws, your imput please, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted December 10, 2011 at 08:06 PM Report Share Posted December 10, 2011 at 08:06 PM Multiple people sharing an office MUST be specifically authorized in the bylaws. If bylaws say that the organization has a 'president' that language cannot properly be interpreted as allowing multiple people to share the office. So, yes, it appears to be a violation of your bylaws as you describe them.Pretty much everyone on this forum will tell you that co-presidents is not a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted December 10, 2011 at 09:36 PM Report Share Posted December 10, 2011 at 09:36 PM Or co-anything.(Except maybe co-habiting is OK.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted December 10, 2011 at 11:38 PM Report Share Posted December 10, 2011 at 11:38 PM I feel that this is in violation of our bylaws, your [input] please,You're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted December 11, 2011 at 08:16 PM Report Share Posted December 11, 2011 at 08:16 PM You're right.You know this... how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted December 11, 2011 at 08:36 PM Report Share Posted December 11, 2011 at 08:36 PM You know this... how? Well, I'm admittedly counting on the description of the bylaws being correct, viz., not providing for co-presidents. Unless my presumption is too presumptuous, having co-presidents would violate the bylaws. Don't you agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted December 11, 2011 at 10:05 PM Report Share Posted December 11, 2011 at 10:05 PM Well, I'm admittedly counting on the description of the bylaws being correct, viz., not providing for co-presidents. Unless my presumption is too presumptuous, having co-presidents would violate the bylaws. Don't you agree?If the bylaws provide for certain officers and don't provide for co-presidents, having co-presidents would conflict with the bylaws, yes. However, I've long since given up on assuming what bylaws say, no matter who says they say what they say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kelly Posted December 14, 2011 at 04:06 PM Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 at 04:06 PM I have a question about bylaws but it is more specific to issues of quorum. Our bylaws say 9 meets quorum of the council of 16, however we have not filled all 16 positions. So my questions is does the 9 quorum still hold if all the seats have not been filled? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted December 14, 2011 at 04:10 PM Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 at 04:10 PM I have a question about bylaws but it is more specific to issues of quorum. Our bylaws say 9 meets quorum of the council of 16, however we have not filled all 16 positions. So my questions is does the 9 quorum still hold if all the seats have not been filled?In general, please start a new topic when asking a new question (even if it seems related to an existing topic title).If your bylaws specify the number '9' then that is what you need, regardless of the number of unfilled seats. If the bylaws said 'majority' then the number required for quorum would indeed go down if some seats remain unfilled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.