cqn Posted March 10, 2014 at 10:46 PM Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 at 10:46 PM Hello all, Our 5 member board (volunteer) is now down to 4 since the resignation of the board President. The two separate nomination to fill the vacancy ended in a TIE vote then the meeting adjourned. How do we get passed deadlock with no direction in our bi-laws? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Britton Posted March 10, 2014 at 10:50 PM Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 at 10:50 PM At your next regular meeting, Keep voting until someone is elected; or, vote to reopen nominations - nominate and elect another person. Either way, keep voting until someone is elected. Which vacancy are you deadlocked on? Filling the board seat, or electing the new Vice-president (presuming their is no special bylaws language concerning a president's resignation). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted March 10, 2014 at 11:16 PM Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 at 11:16 PM If you have a Vice President, or First Vice President, you have no vacancy in the office of President. Under the rules in RONR that person automatically ascends to the office of President. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted March 10, 2014 at 11:24 PM Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 at 11:24 PM If you have a Vice President, or First Vice President, you have no vacancy in the office of President. Under the rules in RONR that person automatically ascends to the office of President. But, presumably, there's still a vacancy on the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted March 10, 2014 at 11:40 PM Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 at 11:40 PM Sure, but probably not in the office of President, Mr. Mt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cqn Posted March 11, 2014 at 06:19 AM Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2014 at 06:19 AM Would the VP who is now acting as the President hold that office until the remainder of the President's term, or until the board seat is filled so we could elect a new President? Thanks all for your replies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cqn Posted March 11, 2014 at 06:35 AM Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2014 at 06:35 AM On the first question: our acting President says RONR says " The President's preference prevails" so he himself can choose the person to fill the board seat even though the general assembly chose not to put this person on the board in the last 2 elections. any comments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted March 11, 2014 at 06:49 AM Report Share Posted March 11, 2014 at 06:49 AM The concept of an "acting" president isn't in RONR - one is either president or not. Do your bylaws define what an "acting president", as distinct from "president", is? On the matter of "RONR says " The President's preference prevails" ". Nope. RONR doesn't say that. RONR says that bylaws supersede RONR's rules. So if your bylaws say the president "prevails" that is fine. If not, then look to your bylaws to see what they do say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted March 11, 2014 at 03:03 PM Report Share Posted March 11, 2014 at 03:03 PM Would the VP who is now acting as the President hold that office until the remainder of the President's term, or until the board seat is filled so we could elect a new President? Unless your bylaws provide otherwise, your former VP is not "acting" as President. He is the President and will serve for the remainder of the term. You don't get to elect a new President. You will elect a new Vice President. On the first question: our acting President says RONR says " The President's preference prevails" so he himself can choose the person to fill the board seat even though the general assembly chose not to put this person on the board in the last 2 elections. RONR says nothing of the sort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cqn Posted March 11, 2014 at 03:57 PM Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2014 at 03:57 PM Thank you for your replies. Our bylaws do not address this issue with respect to tie vote of the remaining board to appoint a new board member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted March 11, 2014 at 04:00 PM Report Share Posted March 11, 2014 at 04:00 PM Our bylaws do not address this issue with respect to tie vote of the remaining board to appoint a new board member. Well then, the board will have to keep voting until its members learn how to compromise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cqn Posted March 11, 2014 at 04:27 PM Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2014 at 04:27 PM Josh, NO, NO, NO, You don't understand. That is not the answer I was looking for! To fully appreciate my dilemma I should tell you this board is an irrigation water board, in Wyoming, a state with a concealed carry law. Unfortunately our meeting are very heated and for the last year or more no chairman has had much success in holding meetings without multiple disruptions. But, Thank you for your response. By the way, what is a Professional Registered Parliamentarian and what do you do as a "Professional Registered Parliamentarian"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted March 11, 2014 at 04:40 PM Report Share Posted March 11, 2014 at 04:40 PM Josh, NO, NO, NO, You don't understand. That is not the answer I was looking for! To fully appreciate my dilemma I should tell you this board is an irrigation water board, in Wyoming, a state with a concealed carry law. Unfortunately our meeting are very heated and for the last year or more no chairman has had much success in holding meetings without multiple disruptions. But, Thank you for your response. Since this is a public body, you may also wish to see if applicable law has anything to say on this subject. By the way, what is a Professional Registered Parliamentarian and what do you do as a "Professional Registered Parliamentarian"? Professional Registered Parliamentarian is a title offered by the National Association of Parliamentarians granted upon the successful completion of courses from that organization, and there are further courses and other professional development requirements in order to maintain that status. Professional parliamentarians generally are those who serve clients in the area of parliamentary procedure. Some of the common roles are serving as a meeting parliamentarian (an adviser to the presiding officer on parliamentary procedure), a consultant in drafting new or revised bylaws and other governing documents, a presenter or educator on parliamentary procedure, or writing an opinion regarding the proper interpretation of an organization's governing documents or the proper application of parliamentary procedure. While it is not a requirement, many professional parliamentarians are members of and have achieved certifications with one or both of the major parliamentary organizations - the National Association of Parliamentarians and the American Institute of Parliamentarians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cqn Posted March 11, 2014 at 05:19 PM Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2014 at 05:19 PM Thanks. I know this doesn't change much but we are a private non-profit company. Thanks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted March 11, 2014 at 05:32 PM Report Share Posted March 11, 2014 at 05:32 PM I know this doesn't change much but we are a private non-profit company. My mistake. It doesn't change anything so far as RONR is concerned. I would still advise seeing if there is anything in applicable law which is relevant to your question, although which laws are applicable will be somewhat different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted March 13, 2014 at 01:20 AM Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 at 01:20 AM ... To fully appreciate my dilemma I should tell you this board is an irrigation water board, in Wyoming, a state with a concealed carry law. Unfortunately our meeting are very heated and for the last year or more no chairman has had much success in holding meetings without multiple disruptions cqn, how do you think the fact that your board is an irrigation water board makes any difference in how decisions are made democratically (that is, with your parliamentary procedure)? And what the hell do you think your damn concealed carry law has any damn thing to do with the democratic process? If you expect anyone might shoot up the place, you don't particularly have a parliamentary question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted March 13, 2014 at 01:27 AM Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 at 01:27 AM cqn, how do you think the fact that your board is an irrigation water board makes any difference in how decisions are made democratically (that is, your parliamentary procedure)? And what the hell do you think your damn concealed carry law has any damn thing to do with the democratic process? If you expect anyone might shoot up the place, you don't particularly have a parliamentary question. Since this was offered in response to what I said in Post #11, it is is apparently the opinion of the OP that it will be difficult for "an irrigation water board, in Wyoming, a state with a concealed carry law" to reach a compromise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted March 13, 2014 at 03:05 AM Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 at 03:05 AM Since this was offered in response to what I said in Post #11, it is is apparently the opinion of the OP that it will be difficult for "an irrigation water board, in Wyoming, a state with a concealed carry law" to reach a compromise.Aw, now look what I went and did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cqnoyes Posted March 13, 2014 at 08:22 PM Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 at 08:22 PM Gary c; The fact that our board is a water board for an irrigation dist. should not change the democratic process but in a dry state, water is a hot issue. And when the bylaws (written in 1919) don't address a tie vote on a board down to 4 because of the resignation, people start trying to interpret to their advantage. Did you get the part where I said HOT issue? This makes the discussions difficult, much like here. Let me guess, I'll bet you jumped in on this little thread because you saw it listed as a Hot topic and now you get to use some of those big powerful words like damn and hell.Sorry to add more fuel Josh. I just can't help it sometimes. Oh, by the way Gary...when two men get toe to toe in a room full of people and are beyond the civil conversation stage as in out last meeting...it does change the dynamics of the discussion when one is known to be packing. At that point, democracy.........its not first on their minds. Have a nice day, I'm busy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted March 13, 2014 at 09:31 PM Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 at 09:31 PM Well. I see I got my comeuppance. Teach me to drop in on a website, out of nowhere, with no history or experience on it, jump in on one Hot topic to show off, and throw my naughty words around. And me not even packin'. (Since Tuesday maybe.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted March 14, 2014 at 01:32 AM Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 at 01:32 AM Got yer cobnuts steamed but good, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.