Immediate past president resign to run for officer position

[Guest tom sheeran]

in upcoming election, the current president (to be immediate past) intends to resign as immediate past so that they may run for officer position. My assumption is that as an ex-official position the immediate past can not resign. Is this a correct assumption?

[jstackpo]

You are correct about the IPP "resigning" - can't do it (logically).

 

But you are incorrect is assuming that RONR has any requirement that someone resign one office to run for (and serve in) a second one.  Is that in your rules?

[Guest Edgar]

My assumption is that as an ex-official position the immediate past can not resign.

 

Well, you may be confusing "ex-official" with "ex-officio". There is no such thing as the former. For the latter, see FAQ #2.

 

Do your bylaws give any official status to the immediate past president (for example, making him a member of the board)? If not, the fact that he used to be president is as irrelevant as the fact that the former treasurer used to be treasurer.

[Guest tom sheeran]

My apologies for misspelling of ex-officio. The By-laws state that the immediate past president is a voting member of the board. Further they state that no one may hold two board positions. therefore I am interpreting that the soon to be immediate past president can not resign and therefore may not run for any officer position...is this a correct assumption?

Thank you

[George Mervosh]

My apologies for misspelling of ex-officio. The By-laws state that the immediate past president is a voting member of the board. Further they state that no one may hold two board positions. therefore I am interpreting that the soon to be immediate past president can not resign and therefore may not run for any officer position...is this a correct assumption?

Thank you

 

I wouldn't make that assumption (from here).   Please see Mr. Honemann's response to a similar question (post #14 in the following thread   http://robertsrules.forumflash.com/index.php?/topic/20242-who-is-immediate-past-president/?hl=%2Bimmediate+%2Bpast+%2Bpresident  )  It's unclear if the person may resign and your bylaws will need properly interpreted by the membership to make such a determination.

[Josh Martin]

Further they state that no one may hold two board positions. therefore I am interpreting that the soon to be immediate past president can not resign and therefore may not run for any officer position...is this a correct assumption?

 

It is ultimately up to your organization to interpret its own bylaws. See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 588-591 for some Principles of Interpretation.

 

I wouldn't make that assumption (from here).   Please see Mr. Honemann's response to a similar question (post #14 in the following thread   http://robertsrules.forumflash.com/index.php?/topic/20242-who-is-immediate-past-president/?hl=%2Bimmediate+%2Bpast+%2Bpresident  )  It's unclear if the person may resign and your bylaws will need properly interpreted by the membership to make such a determination.

 

The question in that thread was whether a President who resigns from that office becomes Immediate Past President.

 

The topic of whether the Immediate Past President may resign from the board when the bylaws make the IPP a member of the board (a recurring debate on this forum) is discussed at great length here, here, and here.

 

Interestingly enough, in all the debate on the issue, no one on either side ever seemed to consider how all this would affect a society whose rules provide that a member cannot serve in more than one office.

[George Mervosh]

It is ultimately up to your organization to interpret its own bylaws. See RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 588-591 for some Principles of Interpretation.

 

 

The question in that thread was whether a President who resigns from that office becomes Immediate Past President.

 

The topic of whether the Immediate Past President may resign from the board when the bylaws make the IPP a member of the board (a recurring debate on this forum) is discussed at great length here, here, and here.

 

Interestingly enough, in all the debate on the issue, no one on either side ever seemed to consider how all this would affect a society whose rules provide that a member cannot serve in more than one office.

 

Thanks for finding the other threads, which makes it abudnantly clear the whole issue of the IPP (no matter what angle you come at from) is unclear and undefined.

[jstackpo]

And here's some reasons why the position of IPP is Bad Idea:

In my personal view, setting up an "official" Immediate Past President (IPP) position is not a particularly good idea.  The most telling argument is the real possibility of a close and bitter race for the presidency, with the current president running (for a second term) against an "outsider".  And the outsider - the "reform candidate", perhaps - wins but is still stuck with the thorn of the IPP on the Board in a position to snipe at the new president.  And perhaps attempt to undermine the new president's plans.  Not to mention vote against them.

If the erstwhile president is a "good guy" the new president can (usually, depending on the bylaws) appoint him to a pre-existing committee - or even have him chair one, which might put him on the Board - as the new president sees fit.  That way the IPP's experience and value can be put to good use, when needed, without the danger of setting up an adversarial situation which would require a bylaw amendment to get out of.

Here's some more reasons

1) The President resigns and wants nothing to do with the organization.
 
2) The President simply doesn't run for election again because he's had enough, and never shows up at a board meeting.
 
3) The President is booted out of office for being incompetent, or for something more nefarious.
 
4) The President dies.
 
5) The President resigns and moves (wants to help but isn't around).

6) Even worse is the bylaw assignment of the IPP to chair a committee - such as nominating.  Then he dies/quits/leaves town, &c.  You are then stuck with an unfillable (by definition) vacancy.

Note that except for item 4, the IPP may well be part of the quorum requirement for meetings, even though he never shows up.