Guest Abigail Posted April 29, 2015 at 05:39 PM Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 at 05:39 PM Hello, We have an issue where someone wants to run for office for our civic association, but is not even a member. Our bylaws clearly state what constitues a member and someone who can vote, but there is nothing listed in our bylaws on what it requires to be an officer of the civic associaiton. Yes, bad bylaws. This person currently can not vote even in this coming election. So, is there something in Robert's Rules that covers this issue? I understand common sense would say they are not eligable, but we have a person who may be willing to argue this. Thank you in advance for any assistance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weldon Merritt Posted April 29, 2015 at 05:50 PM Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 at 05:50 PM "In most societies it is usual to elect the officers from among the members; but in all except secret societies, unless the bylaws provide otherwise, it is possible for an organization to choose its officers from outside its membership." RONR, p. 447, ll. 16-19. If you don't want to elect a non-member, nominate and vote for someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev Ed Posted April 29, 2015 at 05:51 PM Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 at 05:51 PM Nope, RONR does not care who is running for an office. Anyone can run and be elected to an office according to RRNR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted April 29, 2015 at 05:52 PM Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 at 05:52 PM "Bad bylaws"? Not necessarily. There is nothing in RONR that prohibits a non-member from serving as an association officer; any such restriction would have to be in your bylaws. Ultimately, the question will be resolved by the voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Abigail Posted April 29, 2015 at 05:55 PM Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 at 05:55 PM Thank you. Does presedence count? In the past it was simply never allowed by the old board for two decades? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted April 29, 2015 at 05:59 PM Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 at 05:59 PM Thank you. Does presedence count? It's not enough to prohibit the non-member from seeking and holding office. See Mr. Merritt's reply in post #2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Abigail Posted April 29, 2015 at 06:00 PM Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 at 06:00 PM Thank you :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted April 29, 2015 at 06:47 PM Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 at 06:47 PM Thank you. Does presedence count? In the past it was simply never allowed by the old board for two decades? Doesn't matter. In fact, the "old board" had no authority to disallow it. It's more likely the question never came up, but even if it had, the election is controlled by the membership, not the board, and if your bylaws are silent, the rule in RONR (quoted above) is clear. Custom falls to the ground in the face of ink on the page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Abigail Posted April 29, 2015 at 07:25 PM Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 at 07:25 PM Thank you - the newest question that came from this is the following: If I read this correctly, the bylaws and Robert's Rules of Order, does not limit who is allowed to run or be elected. In other words, there is nothing that can allow the Civic Assocation to refuse a person's request to run. However, per the bylaws, only members are allowed to vote. So, if this individual does not live in our town, does not own property in our town or is under 18 years old, he/she is not a member. If he/she is elected to a position, he/she can sit on the board, but has no vote. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted April 29, 2015 at 07:32 PM Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 at 07:32 PM Thank you - the newest question that came from this is the following: If I read this correctly, the bylaws and Robert's Rules of Order, does not limit who is allowed to run or be elected. In other words, there is nothing that can allow the Civic Assocation to refuse a person's request to run. However, per the bylaws, only members are allowed to vote. So, if this individual does not live in our town, does not own property in our town or is under 18 years old, he/she is not a member. If he/she is elected to a position, he/she can sit on the board, but has no vote. Thank you. He may not have any vote in general membership meetings, but if he is a member of the board by virtue of the office he holds, he will be able to vote in meetings of the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Abigail Posted April 29, 2015 at 07:41 PM Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 at 07:41 PM Thank you ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g40 Posted April 29, 2015 at 07:59 PM Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 at 07:59 PM Doesn't this person need to be nominated for this office? Has he/she been so "nominated"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted April 29, 2015 at 08:10 PM Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 at 08:10 PM "Need?" Nope, a write-in vote will do just fine. He/she may need a lot of them, to be sure, like a majority to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g40 Posted April 30, 2015 at 12:12 AM Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 at 12:12 AM OK - How about this "issue". Generally, only "members" have a "right" attend meetings of members. If this person was not a "member", then he would have no right to attend a meeting of members? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted April 30, 2015 at 12:21 AM Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 at 12:21 AM Presuming -- check the bylaws -- the President is ex-officio a member of the Board (or the Board is defined as comprising the president and other officers and other board members), the non-association-member who is president will have every right to attend Board meetings since he is a Board member. He might not have the right to attend general membership meetings, unless the bylaws said that one of the president's duties is to preside over GM meetings (most seem to, that I have seen). See the "Advanced Discussion" for a related question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted April 30, 2015 at 12:30 AM Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 at 12:30 AM If the majority of members don't want this person to be an officer, then, for goodness sake, just elect someone else. If the majority do want him as an officer, well, they have a right to elect him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Abigail Posted April 30, 2015 at 01:12 AM Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 at 01:12 AM Thank you all. It is more of a situation where the current president is stalling the election over and over again. He is in jeopardy of being voted out. We have a hot neighborhood topic that has divided everyone and there is a power issue - or what some think is a power issue. There is another position that no one is jumping for and he found someone who is willng, but is not a member - yet. To be a member you must be 18 years old, live in this designated community, and have attended a general meeting in the past qualifying months that are specified in the bylaws. Additionally, it clearly states that you must have signed in. The person simply has not attended a meeting yet or signed in. It is ALL a big waste of our time while the current president searches for a reason to stall the election yet again. Or, he is looking for a reason to contest the election if it does happen. The board has the power per the bylaws to the very next month appoint this person if she would just attend the next meeting and sign in - for the vacant position if it remains vacant. The current president can't be bothered to even pick up a Robert's Rules of Order to figure this out himself. He is making his Nominating Committee do it even though we feel it is out of our scope. Big waste of time. Thank you again for all your amazing help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintCad Posted April 30, 2015 at 02:26 AM Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 at 02:26 AM Wait? How is the president stalling the election? Isn't holding elections covered in your bylaws? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted April 30, 2015 at 02:28 AM Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 at 02:28 AM Wait? How is the president stalling the election? Isn't holding elections covered in your bylaws?Probably, but a strong-willed, dictatorial president of a group of people who don't know any better can get away with a lot. There have to be members who know how to stand up to him....and are willing to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest A Posted April 30, 2015 at 03:46 AM Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 at 03:46 AM Yes, the bylaws do state that the elections are to be held in April or May. Then this current president tried to amend the bylaws last year without proper procedure, but is trying to operate off of them anyway. His newly amended bylaws states the elections are to be held in April only now. Two days before the elections in April he unilaterally decided to cancel them. A member brought up that they had a problem with him, the president who is up for re-election, was the one accepting the nominations privately and closing them a few days prior to the election. He only notified the community that week the real positions that were up once the fighting started. No one is to question him. He was only originally trying to fill one vacancy of someone who wanted off the board and not to run again. He never told anyone his positions was up or another one that a person he likes is in. No write in was being offered. So, he got mad and cancelled the election without any other officer backing him - no discussion or vote. Then he spoke to a PTA lady and found out about Nominating Committees. He got a Nominating Committee chair and then she got two other people with an alternate. The election date was printed on the agenda for the April meeting, announced verbaly during the April meeting, and a discussion happened, and a vote that was 16 to 0 to have it finished it. Notice went out on the website and at the local community bulletin boards. I am the one on the committee trying to answer his 50 million questions as he tries to hold off the election again. He states he was a "sprite of the law" kind of guy not a "letter of the law" kind of guy, but now that he is under a microscope he will be a "letter of the law" kind of guy. The real kicker is, we discovered during all this crazy research he never filed the association taxes paper work and the federal identification number was revoked back in September of 2013. He states he inherited it like that. No, it happened in the middle of his time on the board. I don't think there is a civic association any more.... In defense of the other people on the board the president does not allow them access to their jobs. He won't let the secretary have the sign in sheets, he won't let the secretary have any documents, the treasurer was never given any tax paperwork, etc. You get the picture. Better than some soap operas. It would be a new edition to War and Peace if I was to go on with more details of what he has pulled. Not Mayberry any more :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted April 30, 2015 at 01:40 PM Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 at 01:40 PM There are too many improper things going on for me to go into them all. Just for a few examples: Unless your bylaws provide otherwise, the president does not have the authority to cancel meetings or elections, the secretary is the custodian of the organization's records, the president should not be involved at all in the nominating committee or appointing the committee, all members have a right to inspect the secretary's records, etc. It sounds like you need help from a professional parliamentarian and/or an attorney (preferably one knowledgeable parliamentary procedure, but they are hard to find) and also to bone up on parliamentary procedure yourself. For starters I suggest you get a copy of "The Right Book" (RONR) and RONR in Brief.... and maybe some extra copies of RONR in Brief to give to other board members. The president needs a copy of both, too. Here are links to RONR and RONRIB (RONR in Brief): http://www.robertsrules.com/book.html and http://www.robertsrules.com/inbrief.html. RONRIB is an excellent primer for learning the basics.... but only the basics. If you or the organization can afford it, I suggest getting a copy for every member of the board. For those who find RONR too hard to understand, I recommend.... in addition to RONR (not as a substitute for it), "Robert's Rules for Dummies" by. C. Alan Jennings. It is not a substitute for RONR, but is a great help in understanding some of the more complex provisions of RONR. All three books are available in most good bookstores, from Amazon, and from NAP (The National Association of Parliamentarians). On Amazon, RONR is $12.34, RONRIB is $7.50 and Robert's Rules for Dummies is $15.29. In bookstores they may be more expensive. If you want to contact a professional parliamentarian, below is the contact information for the two national parliamentary associations: AIP and NAP. They both have referral lists for credentialed parliamentarians. The NAP, in particular, has many local units which have monthly meetings, offer training in parliamentary procedure, welcome guests, and might be of assistance in getting questions answered and in finding a parliamentarian. NAP also has a wide assortment of books and CD's on various aspects of parliamentary procedure. National Association of Parliamentarians (NAP)213 South Main St.Independence, MO 64050-3850Phone: 888-627-2929e-mail: hq@NAP2.org www.parliamentarians.orgAmerican Institute of Parliamentarians (AIP)618 Church Street, Ste 220Nashville, TN 37219Phone: 888-664-0428e-mail: aip@aipparl.orgwww.aipparl.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Abigail Posted April 30, 2015 at 01:52 PM Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 at 01:52 PM Thank you Richard Brown and all the knowledgeable people sharing here. I appreciate the contact information and all the wonderful assistance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintCad Posted April 30, 2015 at 05:28 PM Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 at 05:28 PM It sounds like there are many in your organization frustrated with him and that it seems that he has done enough as chair to warrant discipline so you would want to look at Chapter XX and weigh your options. Get rid of him permanently? Replace him temporarily to hold elections? Lots of options here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Abigail Posted May 1, 2015 at 04:29 PM Report Share Posted May 1, 2015 at 04:29 PM Hello Saint Cad - we are trying to figure out how to do that if we can. The bylaws are not very good and I can say that because I do belong to a different organization that has excellent ones. Some of my neighbors asked for my help because I have a LITTLE experience. I am way in over my head with this disfunctional group. This site has been a gift! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.