Guest Sheila Gilbert Posted July 20, 2015 at 12:53 AM Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 at 12:53 AM Recently at a State Committee meeting we were going to fill vacancies. Several vacancies were unopposed. The Chair chose to call for a vote rather than place the nominee in the office given there was no opponent. Each nominee was voted down. The Chair misused her authority in order to keep those whom she didn't want by allowing the block voters to dominate.Isn't this a violation of Robert's Rules? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 20, 2015 at 01:02 AM Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 at 01:02 AM Recently at a State Committee meeting we were going to fill vacancies. Several vacancies were unopposed. The Chair chose to call for a vote rather than place the nominee in the office given there was no opponent. Each nominee was voted down. The Chair misused her authority in order to keep those whom she didn't want by allowing the block voters to dominate.Isn't this a violation of Robert's Rules?What happened next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted July 20, 2015 at 01:06 AM Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 at 01:06 AM Each nominee was voted down. The only way to "vote down" a nominee is to vote for someone else. Is that what happened? And, as Mr. Martin asked, what happened next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted July 20, 2015 at 01:09 AM Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 at 01:09 AM I have a feeling that this was not a "committee meeting" in the sense of a meeting of a regular committee that most organizations might have, but rather that this "committee" is a governing body of some sort, such as a state central committee of a political party. More information as to both what happened and the nature of this "committee" would be helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted July 20, 2015 at 11:32 AM Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 at 11:32 AM Recently at a State Committee meeting we were going to fill vacancies. Several vacancies were unopposed. The Chair chose to call for a vote rather than place the nominee in the office given there was no opponent. Each nominee was voted down. The Chair misused her authority in order to keep those whom she didn't want by allowing the block voters to dominate.Isn't this a violation of Robert's Rules? Yes, calling for a voice vote when there is only one nominee for a given office is a violation of the rule that, in such a case, the chair simply declares the sole nominee elected (RONR, 11th ed., p. 443, ll. 7-12). No vote is taken. However, the time to raise a point of order concerning such a violation is when it occurs. This all assumes that (i) voice votes were taken, and (ii) the bylaws do not require that a ballot vote be taken even when there is only one nominee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.