Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

No Eligible Nominees


Guest Guest

Recommended Posts

In this situation officer terms are for 2 years (the entire board is elected together) and the bylaws state that nominees for president must have been an active member in good standing for 3 years. The nominating committee has determined that no eligible members will run for the office of president. However, it is possible that a newer member would step into the office. The bylaws currently do not allow specifically for suspension of the 3 year rule. Is this a rule that can be suspended by 2/3 vote? OR should the bylaw be amended to allow for suspension? OR should the bylaw be amended to allow for newer members to serve as officers?

My initial thought is that the nominating committee should present a slate with a vacancy in the space for president. If no one steps forward at that time a motion could be made by a member to amend the bylaw to allow for suspending the rule. The amendment could be voted on in the following month, which is when elections take place.

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qualifications for serving in an office cannot be suspended unless the bylaws specifically provide for its suspension. However, amending the bylaws to add a suspension provision OR getting rid of/changing the qualification requirement is an option.

But do remember that you need to follow the rules in your bylaws for amending the bylaws to add the suspension or change the qualifications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two possibilities:

1) (The optimistic one): set out to amend the bylaws, if you have time, on election night before you open the floor for nominations and have the elections. Since bylaw amendments go into effect immediately, that will clear the deck for the enthusiastic newbies to run and serve.

2) (The pessimistic one):

First check the bylaws. Officers (current ones) may be in office "until the election of their successors" - if no election, they STAY in (at least until they quit or you finally do complete the election).

Or....

Announce that because of a lack of leadership interest, the organization will dissolve itself and go out of business. Really. Organizations don't last forever, and it is much better to close up shop formally than just drift along, and then wonder what happened to the bank account, far too long after the fact to do anything about it.

Often enough a threat like this one will shake some people out of the woodwork who will be willing to serve after all. But if it doesn't, there is a message there...

You might also consider WHY no one wants to be president. Perhaps you're asking too much of that position. Perhaps the past presidents have made the job appear more difficult than it has to be. Perhaps the members are making it harder on the president than they should.

Perhaps the board should be doing more. After all, the only essential role of the president is to preside at meetings. Some or all administrative responsibilities could be delegated to, or distributed among, the board members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this case, the nominating committee is considering making a motion to amend the bylaws. Since the nominating committee is a special committee, shouldn't a member of that committee make that motion on their own AFTER the slate is presented?

The amendment can be offered at any time by anybody as long as your current rules for amending your bylaws are followed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this case, the nominating committee is considering making a motion to amend the bylaws. Since the nominating committee is a special committee, shouldn't a member of that committee make that motion on their own AFTER the slate is presented?

The nominating committee (as a committee) has no business recommending changes to the bylaws, let alone making motions proposing bylaws amendments.

An individual member of the committee may certainly make such a motion (following whatever rules the bylaws set out for their amendment process).

As you seem to suspect, however, the job of the nominating committee is to look for good candidates and to make nominations (not as a 'slate'... but that's an unrelated quibble with your choice of words). The committee can't just decide to take other business into its hands. There was a recent thread on this topic -- I'll post a link later if I can find it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The nominating committee (as a committee) has no business recommending changes to the bylaws, let alone making motions proposing bylaws amendments.

Usually I would agree with you. However, in this case I would have to disagree. Since the committee's job is to make a nomination for President and they aren't able to find anyone who is eligible and willing to serve and a roadblock is that the bylaws impose qualifications on nominees for President I believe it within the committee's purview to propose an amendment regarding nominees for President in order to rectify the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the relevant thread I mentioned in my earlier post:

http://robertsrules....__fromsearch__1

Chris, does this change your opinion at all?

Well it appears as if my opinion is in the minority. Such is life <shrug>. But in the scheme of things it probably doesn't matter that much whether the proposal came from the committee or from a single member (the reporting member?) unless the bylaws require that proposed amendments come from a committee or multiple members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this case, the nominating committee is considering making a motion to amend the bylaws. Since the nominating committee is a special committee, shouldn't a member of that committee make that motion on their own AFTER the slate is presented?

The nominating committee should report on their nominations and promptly go out of business. Bylaws amendments would seem to be well beyond the scope of the duties they are charged with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...