Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Who decides to elect one at a time?


Recommended Posts

As RONR In Brief puts it, "It is possible either to take nominations for all offices before electing any, or to take nominations for the first office, conduct the election for that office, and then repeat this procedure for each of the offices to be filled by election." (See RONR In Brief 2nd ed, p. 79. See RONR 11th ed, p. 435, ll. 27-34.)

Suppose the chair plans on the first approach (nominations for all offices before electing any), but a member wishes to follow the second approach.

Is this done by the demand of one member, or by majority vote? Can this interrupt? Is there a time limit?

My initial thoughts are

  1. this situation amounts to a form of division of the question by demand of a single member (p. 274),
  2. the member can interrupt and request (demand) the division at any time in the process before the election to all the offices has been put to vote (p. 275),
  3. nominations for further offices cease until elections are completed separately for any offices for which nominations have been closed, and
  4. custom alone does not trump the above.

Feedback welcome. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As RONR In Brief puts it, "It is possible either to take nominations for all offices before electing any, or to take nominations for the first office, conduct the election for that office, and then repeat this procedure for each of the offices to be filled by election." (See RONR In Brief 2nd ed, p. 79. See RONR 11th ed, p. 435, ll. 27-34.)

Suppose the chair plans on the first approach (nominations for all offices before electing any), but a member wishes to follow the second approach.

Is this done by the demand of one member, or by majority vote? Can this interrupt? Is there a time limit?

My initial thoughts are

  1. this situation amounts to a form of division of the question by demand of a single member (p. 274),
  2. the member can interrupt and request (demand) the division at any time in the process before the election to all the offices has been put to vote (p. 275),
  3. nominations for further offices cease until elections are completed separately for any offices for which nominations have been closed, and
  4. custom alone does not trump the above.

Feedback welcome. Thanks.

"A custom of the organization" should determine which is used. That would imply that RONR contains no rule that conflicts with such a custom.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As RONR In Brief puts it, "It is possible either to take nominations for all offices before electing any, or to take nominations for the first office, conduct the election for that office, and then repeat this procedure for each of the offices to be filled by election." (See RONR In Brief 2nd ed, p. 79. See RONR 11th ed, p. 435, ll. 27-34.)

Suppose the chair plans on the first approach (nominations for all offices before electing any), but a member wishes to follow the second approach.

Is this done by the demand of one member, or by majority vote? Can this interrupt? Is there a time limit?

My initial thoughts are

  1. this situation amounts to a form of division of the question by demand of a single member (p. 274),
  2. the member can interrupt and request (demand) the division at any time in the process before the election to all the offices has been put to vote (p. 275),
  3. nominations for further offices cease until elections are completed separately for any offices for which nominations have been closed, and
  4. custom alone does not trump the above.

Feedback welcome. Thanks.

I think it would take a majority vote. These seem to be very related.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As RONR In Brief puts it, "It is possible either to take nominations for all offices before electing any, or to take nominations for the first office, conduct the election for that office, and then repeat this procedure for each of the offices to be filled by election." (See RONR In Brief 2nd ed, p. 79. See RONR 11th ed, p. 435, ll. 27-34.)

Suppose the chair plans on the first approach (nominations for all offices before electing any), but a member wishes to follow the second approach.

Is this done by the demand of one member, or by majority vote? Can this interrupt? Is there a time limit?

My initial thoughts are

  1. this situation amounts to a form of division of the question by demand of a single member (p. 274),
  2. the member can interrupt and request (demand) the division at any time in the process before the election to all the offices has been put to vote (p. 275),
  3. nominations for further offices cease until elections are completed separately for any offices for which nominations have been closed, and
  4. custom alone does not trump the above.

Feedback welcome. Thanks.

"Where there is no determining rule, a motion to fix the method of voting (or any other detail of nomination or election procedure) is an incidental main motion if made before the election is pending, or an incidental motion if made while the election is pending (30, 31)." ((RONR, 11th ed., p. 438, ll. 26-31).

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Where there is no determining rule, a motion to fix the method of voting (or any other detail of nomination or election procedure) is an incidental main motion if made before the election is pending, or an incidental motion if made while the election is pending (30, 31)." ((RONR, 11th ed., p. 438, ll. 26-31).

This fits well with post #2. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but post #2 stops short of providing the answer.

And perhaps post #4 also stops short of providing a complete answer without the additional reference to page 439, lines 5-7. :)

In my experience, Paul doesn't need much of a start to complete his own answer. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my experience, Paul doesn't need much of a start to complete his own answer. ;)

I certainly agree, but Paul isn't the only person who reads this forum.

We want to make sure that our readers understand that a motion to divide the question (which also requires a majority vote for its adoption) is not the answer. In other words, looking at Section 27 is barking up the wrong tree (or some such thing).

Edited by Dan Honemann
To remove a smiley face, since I've gone over my quota for the day.
Link to post
Share on other sites
And perhaps post #4 also stops short of providing a complete answer without the additional reference to page 439, lines 5-7. :)

Not to mention page 438, l. 34 to page 439, l. 3: "In the absence of a rule establishing the method of voting, the rule that is established by custom, if any, should be followed, unless the assembly, by adoption of an incidental motion or incidental main motion, agrees to do otherwise." :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...