Nominating Committee and bylaws

[Guest Jim]

Can you put it into your bylaws that you will not accept nominations from the floor? All candidates must be presented to the membership by the nominating committee.

[Hieu H. Huynh]

Yes.

[Rev Ed]

Yes.  But according to RONR, the Nominating Committee is only required to recommend one person per position (the most qualified person in theory), so the organization may want to consider whether or not it really wants the Nominating Committee to effectively decide who will be elected if members cannot make nominations from the floor.

[Hieu H. Huynh]

Yes.  But according to RONR, the Nominating Committee is only required to recommend one person per position (the most qualified person in theory), so the organization may want to consider whether or not it really wants the Nominating Committee to effectively decide who will be elected if members cannot make nominations from the floor.

 

Actually, RONR says, "Although it is not common for the nominating committee to nominate more than one candidate for any office, the committee can do so unless the bylaws prohibit it." (RONR 11th ed., p. 433, ll. 22-24)

[Guest Guest]

To what extent--if at all--are bylaw rules regarding nomination procedures properly capable of "suspend the rules" motions?

 

For instance, in one case, at a silly extreme, if a bylaw says "nominations from the floor can only be made standing and facing the chairman, and with one hand on the Bible", and member X is a quadruple amputee, my guess is, this rule is liable to suspension if X wishes to nominate someone. (If I'm wrong, the rest of my questions are just blind-alley explorations.)

 

Suppose, though a bylaw reads "Every election shall be by ballot. Nominees shall be listed alphabetically, however, only nominees approved by the Nominating Committee shall be listed."

 

Are there reasonable circumstances under which it is clear that this rule can be suspended? (That is, a floor nominee added to the listing.) Ditto, where it clearly could not?

 

I'm liable to overthink these things--be kind on this Thanksgiving Day--but it (naively?) appears to me, that if everything having to do with an election--except the Nominating Committee deliberations--takes place in a meeting, then these type of rules are in the nature of rules of order?

[Josh Martin]

Yes. But according to RONR, the Nominating Committee is only required to recommend one person per position (the most qualified person in theory), so the organization may want to consider whether or not it really wants the Nominating Committee to effectively decide who will be elected if members cannot make nominations from the floor.

Write-in votes are still permitted, unless the bylaws prohibit those as well. The rule could also be suspended. I agree, however, that the rule seems ill-advised.

Actually, RONR says, "Although it is not common for the nominating committee to nominate more than one candidate for any office, the committee can do so unless the bylaws prohibit it." (RONR 11th ed., p. 433, ll. 22-24)

While the committee is permitted to elect more candidates, it is not required to do so (and such requirements don't work very well anyway).

It is possible that this nominating committee works very differently, but if the committee works the same as described in RONR, I think Rev Ed's concern is quite valid.

To what extent--if at all--are bylaw rules regarding nomination procedures properly capable of "suspend the rules" motions?

Rules regarding nominations are generally in the nature of rules of order and therefore suspendable.

For instance, in one case, at a silly extreme, if a bylaw says "nominations from the floor can only be made standing and facing the chairman, and with one hand on the Bible", and member X is a quadruple amputee, my guess is, this rule is liable to suspension if X wishes to nominate someone. (If I'm wrong, the rest of my questions are just blind-alley explorations.)

Oh, I don't even think a formal motion to suspend the rules is necessary in that extreme case. Such rules should be interpreted liberally. Similarly, if the rules require a member to stand to seek recognition, this does not mean that a suspension of the rules is needed for a member who cannot stand to speak.

Suppose, though a bylaw reads "Every election shall be by ballot. Nominees shall be listed alphabetically, however, only nominees approved by the Nominating Committee shall be listed."

Are there reasonable circumstances under which it is clear that this rule can be suspended? (That is, a floor nominee added to the listing.) Ditto, where it clearly could not?

In my opinion, if the rules stated are all the bylaws say on the subject, the rule may be suspended to permit nominations from the floor in any case.

An example of where the rule could not be suspended was if the rule said "Only candidates nominated by the Nominating Committee shall be eligible for office." Rules regarding eligibility may not be suspended, unless the rule so provides.