election of President at AGM

[Guest joanna]

Our community association bylaws state that the AGM "shall elect" a president.   This year so far the Nominations Committee has not been able to find a candidate willing to stand for President.   Even though our practice has been to accept nominations from the floor, we are concerned that an unsuitable candidate might be nominated for this crucial position.   Membership in the community association is open to anyone who resides in the community which has a population of about 20,000.   All they have to provide is their name, address and contact information plus $5.   We would prefer not to accept unknown candidates and to continue the search and have another AGM once there are one or more candidates willing to serve that have the requisite experience and knowledge.    

 

Candidates for the Board (including the President and Directors) are always asked to make brief presentations on their background, experience and why they want the job.    And we have in the past even voted on candidates who are not opposed though there has never been to my recollection any votes against when there is only one candidate.     In this case, would it be in order to explain (prior to asking for nominations from the floor) that any candidate nominated or self-nominated should make the presentation to the membership on their background, experience and why they want the position and that they will also have to have a majority of votes in favour -- ie. the Chair will call for votes in favour, votes against and abstentions and that only if the candidate gets a majority votes will he or she be elected. 

 

There is nothing in the by-laws which stipulates how the vote for President will be conducted.  

 

[jstackpo]

Except for the bit about calling for "abstentions", what you describe for a voice vote process is right out of the book.  p. 442

[Gary c Tesser]

That'll teach us to meander off into byways and leave you hanging.

Twenty thousand, and you have to beat the bushes?

[Dan Honemann]

"In an assembly or organization that does not have a rule or established custom prescribing the method of voting in elections, the voting can be by any of the accepted methods. ... 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." (RONR, 11th ed. pp. 438-39.)

[Guest Edgar]

 . . . we are concerned that an unsuitable candidate might be nominated for this crucial position. 

 

Are you saying that "we" (a minority of the members) are concerned that "they" (a majority of the members) will elect someone you don't support?

[Rev Ed]

Edgar, I don't think it was meant that way.  I can understand the issue here, if the Nominating Committee cannot find someone who wants to be President, then anyone who shows up on the day of the meeting and pays their membership fee can run for President.  With a population of 20,000 it is likely that someone would know the candidate, but it still presents a situation that potentially could be less than ideal.

 

Then again, if the membership does not want a virtual stranger to run for President, then someone needs to stand for election.

[Guest Edgar]

 . . .  anyone who shows up on the day of the meeting and pays their membership fee can run for President.

 

Then again, if the membership does not want a virtual stranger to run for President . . . 

 

I don't think they're afraid that a "virtual stranger" will run for president, I think they're afraid he'll be elected. And that, of course, takes votes. Perhaps the votes of other "strangers".

[Josh Martin]

In this case, would it be in order to explain (prior to asking for nominations from the floor) that any candidate nominated or self-nominated should make the presentation to the membership on their background, experience and why they want the position and that they will also have to have a majority of votes in favour -- ie. the Chair will call for votes in favour, votes against and abstentions and that only if the candidate gets a majority votes will he or she be elected. 

 

Abstentions are not counted. Otherwise, it is correct that a majority in the affirmative is required. If the vote is taken by ballot (which is probably preferable), you would not vote "for" or "against." Rather, members would vote for a candidate of their choice (even a candidate who has not been nominated). If the vote is taken by voice (which is not recommended), you would vote for or against each nominated candidate, in the order they were nominated. In any event, a majority of the votes cast is required for election.

 

If no one is elected, you vote again. So this strategy isn't going to buy you very much time. If you really want to "continue the search and have another AGM once there are one or more candidates willing to serve that have the requisite experience and knowledge," you should set up an adjourned meeting and postpone the election to that meeting.. 

 

I don't think they're afraid that a "virtual stranger" will run for president, I think they're afraid he'll be elected. And that, of course, takes votes. Perhaps the votes of other "strangers".

 

It doesn't take very many votes if you're unopposed. I think the concern is that someone will run who the majority opposes, but they won't have an alternative.

[Guest joanna]

just want to thank everyone for very helpful comments -- even the suspicions about our intentions made us think the issues through.    We followed Mr Honemann's advice and the AGM tonight unanimously passed the incidental motion changing our voting procedures and requiring a vote even if there was only one candidate.    Because of the discussion surrounding the motion, the assembly seemed to take its responsibilities very seriously.  We did get two nominations from the floor from candidates both of whom had previous experience on similar Boards.   The assembly spent 45 minutes asking questions of both candidates to ascertain as much as possible about their qualifications, experience and other qualities they felt were important.    And we elected one of the candidates.   The other won a place as a Director on the Board.   The overall feeling at the end was that it was one of the best elections we have had in a long time.   Many thanks.   I don't think It would have proceeded so smoothly with such a good outcome without this RR forum.

[Gary c Tesser]

So, Joanna, perhaps you will come back a couple of times a week with your RONR-In Brief and you RONR at your elbow, and answer a few of other people's questions yourself, perhaps? Then maybe Dr Stackpole and Edgar and I can maybe take a couple of days off every couple of years and maybe go fishing in West Virginia or something. Then by maybe 2017 you can come too.

[George Mervosh]

  We followed Mr Honemann's advice

 

Then maybe Dr Stackpole and Edgar and I can maybe take a couple of days off every couple of years and maybe go fishing in West Virginia or something. Then by maybe 2017 you can come too.

 

Mr. Honemann saves the day and he's not invited to go fishing? 

[jstackpo]

He goes all the time, on Chesapeake Bay, on his own  (to the envy of us all).