Guest Annonymous Posted July 24, 2015 at 02:19 AM Report Share Posted July 24, 2015 at 02:19 AM At our midsummer council meeting two things take place: the installation of newly elected members of the council, and the election of officers of the council. The by-laws state the first order of business at the July meeting should be the swearing in of the new council members. However the agenda for our July meeting put the election of officers first. Then came the swearing in of new members. The result was that the Executive Committee (the officers) were elected by the out-going council, rather than by the incoming council. Unfortunately, no one questioned the order of items on the agenda before or at the start of the meeting. Is the election of the officers valid? Is it too late to do something about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted July 24, 2015 at 02:48 AM Report Share Posted July 24, 2015 at 02:48 AM When do your bylaws say Council Members take office? Often swearing-in is merely a ceremonial step which doesn't actually transfer power (the transfer took place at some earlier time). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted July 24, 2015 at 03:05 AM Report Share Posted July 24, 2015 at 03:05 AM When do your bylaws say Council Members take office? Often swearing-in is merely a ceremonial step which doesn't actually transfer power (the transfer took place at some earlier time)."Newly elected [Members] shall be impaneled with the incumbent Council Members as the first order of business at the July meeting following the election. Outgoing [Members] will step down from the Council at the same time."From another section of the bylaws: "The election of officers will take place at the first regularly scheduled meeting of the newly elected Council." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted July 24, 2015 at 11:58 AM Report Share Posted July 24, 2015 at 11:58 AM If we assume that the newly-elected councilpersons do not become members of the council until they're "impaneled", there might be a problem if any of them were elected officers (since, not yet being council members, they presumably wouldn't be eligible). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timothy Posted July 24, 2015 at 12:11 PM Report Share Posted July 24, 2015 at 12:11 PM A motion to adopt an agenda that places election of officers first would be out of order, since it conflicts with the bylaws. A point of order should have been raised at that time. Even so, by suspending the rules, it would be possible to take up election of officers first anyway. At this point, you may be able to remove the officers from office and elect the people you want. The wording of you bylaws can make a significant difference on what is required to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted July 24, 2015 at 01:06 PM Report Share Posted July 24, 2015 at 01:06 PM "Newly elected [Members] shall be impaneled with the incumbent Council Members as the first order of business at the July meeting following the election. Outgoing [Members] will step down from the Council at the same time."From another section of the bylaws: "The election of officers will take place at the first regularly scheduled meeting of the newly elected Council." I want to give this some more thought, but it seems pretty clear that the election of officers is to be conducted by the council after the newly elected members take office. I think that provision is non-suspendable as it relates to who is eligible to vote for the officers. The election of officers by people who were not entitled to be voting might seems to me to constitute a continuing breach and make the election invalid. It strikes me as no different than erroneously allowing former members of a society to participate in a vote. What I'm not so sure about is whether only the votes cast by those ineligible to vote should be considered in determining whether they could have affected the results and ordering a new election only for those officers or whether the entire election is null and void. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted July 24, 2015 at 05:14 PM Report Share Posted July 24, 2015 at 05:14 PM I want to give this some more thought, but it seems pretty clear that the election of officers is to be conducted by the council after the newly elected members take office. I think that provision is non-suspendable as it relates to who is eligible to vote for the officers. The election of officers by people who were not entitled to be voting might seems to me to constitute a continuing breach and make the election invalid. It strikes me as no different than erroneously allowing former members of a society to participate in a vote. What I'm not so sure about is whether only the votes cast by those ineligible to vote should be considered in determining whether they could have affected the results and ordering a new election only for those officers or whether the entire election is null and void.The executive committee was elected by acclamation of a slate. A new election by the new council would start over, with an invitation for nominations from the floor. If someone or some persons on the new council were to make nominations from the floor, the outcome, i.e. the composition of the Executive Committee, might be different from what it is now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 24, 2015 at 06:45 PM Report Share Posted July 24, 2015 at 06:45 PM A motion to adopt an agenda that places election of officers first would be out of order, since it conflicts with the bylaws. A point of order should have been raised at that time. Even so, by suspending the rules, it would be possible to take up election of officers first anyway. At this point, you may be able to remove the officers from office and elect the people you want. The wording of you bylaws can make a significant difference on what is required to do that.This isn't simply an issue of things happening in the wrong order (which would indeed require a Point of Order to be raised at the time). The bylaws specifically provide that the election of officers will take place at the first meeting of the newly elected council, and that those members shall take office at the beginning of that meeting. The new members did not take office at the beginning of the meeting, and the previous members conducted the election.The executive committee was elected by acclamation of a slate. A new election by the new council would start over, with an invitation for nominations from the floor. If someone or some persons on the new council were to make nominations from the floor, the outcome, i.e. the composition of the Executive Committee, might be different from what it is now.Based on all of the information that has been provided, it seems to me that the violation does constitute a continuing breach and the election is null and void. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lerobertson124 Posted July 28, 2015 at 02:06 PM Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 at 02:06 PM Can a member who has been nominated for office serve on the nominating committee where the names are submitted and the ballots are created? Or is this a conflict of interest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted July 28, 2015 at 02:13 PM Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 at 02:13 PM Can a member who has been nominated for office serve on the nominating committee where the names are submitted and the ballots are created? Or is this a conflict of interest? Please post your question as a new topic. Click here for more information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.