Guest frank boertlein Posted December 14, 2011 at 06:11 PM Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 at 06:11 PM is it possible to vote on putting the bylaws aside for elections to elect a candidate for the good of the orginazation with more training and experiance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted December 14, 2011 at 06:17 PM Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 at 06:17 PM Probably not. But if you supply more details we might be able to give a more definitive answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert B Fish Posted December 14, 2011 at 06:30 PM Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 at 06:30 PM Since your post apparently refers to qualifications required to hold office, it's important to read them carefully to see exactly WHAT is prohibited. Is it nominating the person? Is it electing him/her? Is it a bar on him serving? [Mount soapbox] This should be a caution to everyone who's considering provisions in your bylaws regarding qualifications for office. How absolute do you want them to be? Should there be an escape clause or method to suspend them? Are you sure? [Dismount soapbox]-Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest frank boertlein Posted December 14, 2011 at 06:33 PM Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 at 06:33 PM relating to a rule that a person must be a member of the orginiazation for 2 years before running for officer in a fire company but the person has over 25 years experiance in another fire company and was an officer and more qualified than any other candidate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted December 14, 2011 at 06:39 PM Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 at 06:39 PM relating to a rule that a person must be a member of the orginiazation for 2 years before running for officer in a fire company but the person has over 25 years experiance in another fire company and was an officer and more qualified than any other candidateNo, such a rule in the bylaws is not suspendable. However, perhaps there is time to amend the bylaws to make the rule suspendable, should the members wish to do so. You would have to follow the rules for amending your bylaws, of course, in order to adopt such an amendment. Whether that can be done prior to the election is for you to determine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted December 14, 2011 at 07:50 PM Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 at 07:50 PM relating to a rule that a person must be a member of the orginiazation for 2 years before running for officer in a fire company but the person has over 25 years experiance in another fire company and was an officer and more qualified than any other candidateWhat defines "running for officer?" Is it "campaigning"? Being nominated? Talking yourself up to the membership in solicitation of support? If the bylaws prevent a member from "running", that may not prevent them from being elected by write-in vote. The exact language of your bylaw, which we cannot interpret here for you, may actually hold your answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted December 14, 2011 at 09:39 PM Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 at 09:39 PM However, perhaps there is time to amend the bylaws to make the rule suspendable . . .If the bylaws are going to be amended, I think I'd prefer that the requirements be made more flexible (e.g. accepting experience in other fire companies) rather than introduce the slippery notion of suspendable rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted December 15, 2011 at 01:41 AM Report Share Posted December 15, 2011 at 01:41 AM is it possible to vote on putting the bylaws aside for elections to elect a candidate for the good of the orginazation with more training and experiancerelating to a rule that a person must be a member of the orginiazation for 2 years before running for officer in a fire company but the person has over 25 years experiance in another fire company and was an officer and more qualified than any other candidateThe rule in question may not be suspended or "set aside" unless it specifically provides for its suspension. The Bylaws could be amended to change the requirement (such as by allowing service in another fire company as a permissible alternative), to add a suspension clause, or to remove the requirement altogether, but any such amendment would follow the amendment process in your Bylaws.Since it seems unlikely there will be time to amend the Bylaws before the election, some "workarounds" might include postponing the election or electing someone to the position who is in support of the preferred candidate. Such a person would serve temporarily and then resign when the Bylaws are amended, so that the preferred candidate could be elected to fill the vacancy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAWVET Posted December 15, 2011 at 07:47 AM Report Share Posted December 15, 2011 at 07:47 AM Since it seems unlikely there will be time to amend the Bylaws before the election, some "workarounds" might include postponing the election or electing someone to the position who is in support of the preferred candidate. Such a person would serve temporarily and then resign when the Bylaws are amended, so that the preferred candidate could be elected to fill the vacancy.I have always respected your responses, but could you please explain the above. Should the elected President resign, I was under the assumption that in most circumstances, the VP would become the President. Thus, there would be a vacancy in the VP position. Am not too experienced in RONR so may be it is a "workaround" solution of which I am not familiar with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted December 15, 2011 at 10:11 AM Report Share Posted December 15, 2011 at 10:11 AM I have always respected your responses, but could you please explain the above. Should the elected President resign, I was under the assumption that in most circumstances, the VP would become the President. Thus, there would be a vacancy in the VP position. Am not too experienced in RONR so may be it is a "workaround" solution of which I am not familiar with.What gave you the impression that the candidate was running for president? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Steve Britton Posted December 15, 2011 at 04:01 PM Report Share Posted December 15, 2011 at 04:01 PM Mr. or Ms. Hawvet:Mr. Martin's suggestion is a general "work around" that could be applied in most cases, to all offices except the office of President. No one had specified in this thread (until your post) that this was specific to a president's resignation. I'm sure that Josh would amend his answer if more specifics were presented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAWVET Posted December 15, 2011 at 04:06 PM Report Share Posted December 15, 2011 at 04:06 PM What gave you the impression that the candidate was running for president?OLD AGE! We read and assume too many things or not paying attention. Sorry, my error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAWVET Posted December 15, 2011 at 04:16 PM Report Share Posted December 15, 2011 at 04:16 PM Mr. or Ms. Hawvet:Mr. Martin's suggestion is a general "work around" that could be applied in most cases, to all offices except the office of President. No one had specified in this thread (until your post) that this was specific to a president's resignation. I'm sure that Josh would amend his answer if more specifics were presented.Thanks. It is a Mister. I haven't been on the board long and do notice that Mr. Martin is very knowledgeable and gives excellent responses. Before questioning, I should have re-read the thread. My mind was too focussed on the term "work around" and now do understand this alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.