Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Nominating someone who is not present


Guest Jeff

Recommended Posts

Does RONR speak to whether someone needs to accept a nomination made for their being a candidate for an elected position?

Here's an example I faced today. In an organization that held an Annual Meeting, a long list of positions were up for election. A number of people who were nominated by the Nominating Committee were present at the meeting and when their names were announced, they declined. Some people were nominated from the floor and some accepted, but some declined. Someone was nominated from the floor for the position of VP. That person had not been asked. He was not present. A majority of the members at the meeting voted on a motion to require either that anyone nominated from the Nominating Committee or from the floor be present and accept the nomination or beforehand have accepted the nomination if they weren't at the meeting.

Do RONR require a nominee to first accept the nomination before moving on to an election?

Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A majority of the members at the meeting voted on a motion to require either that anyone nominated from the Nominating Committee or from the floor be present and accept the nomination or beforehand have accepted the nomination if they weren't at the meeting.

Do you mean they adopted this motion?

I would think such a restriction would have to be in the bylaws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info. The motion I mentioned was in fact a Bylaws amendment made after the election to deal with this issue that arose during the election. It so happened that the person nominated from the floor who was not present did not win (it was not a close vote). Moving forward with the new Bylaws amendment, the group has this new rule in place as part of its nominations process. If it is now in the Bylaws (there was beyond a 2/3 majority in favor of this), then it is OK for future elections?

What is a 251(e) violation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it is now in the Bylaws (there was beyond a 2/3 majority in favor of this), then it is OK for future elections?

Yes. However, you should check the bylaws to make sure that all of the requirements they spell out for their amendment were followed. That 2/3 were in favor of it may not be enough depending on the bylaws.

What is a 251(e) violation?

With five exceptions a Point of Order must be timely. If one of those five exceptions (located on RONR p. 251) occur the normal timeliness requirement doesn't apply. P. 251(e) is saying that if the rights of absentees, the basic rights of an individual member, or a rule requiring a ballot vote are violated the timeliness requirement doesn't apply. See RONR pp. 250-251 for details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...