Can a Parliamentarian hold another office?

[DJGarvin]

Our organization has a Board of Directors in Columbia, SC and then is divided into 10 territorial Caucuses.

The Chair of the Board appointed an individual, who is a member of our Caucus, as Parliamentarian for the Board.

The Board is comprised of the Executive Officers (Chair, Chair protem, Treasurer, Secretary, Records Clerk), the Parliamentarian, Chairs of each Caucus and a Board Representative for each Caucus.

The Board Representative for our Caucus is also the appointed Parliamentarian, a motion at our Caucus was recently made that another person from our Caucus should be the Board Representative for our Caucus, because the Parliamentarian can't hold both positions since the Parliamentarian can't put aside their Parliamentarian duties temporarily to take on the duties of the other office. It was determined during debate that this would best be taken on by the Board, so the motion was withdrawn.

There was much cacophony, I could hear nothing, supposedly a motion was made to take it to the Board, but I never heard.

[Transpower]

RONR (11th ed.), p. 467, ll.8-16:  "A member of an assembly who acts as its parliamentarian has the same duty as the presiding officer to maintain a position of impartiality, and therefore does not make motions, participate in debate, or vote on any question except in the case of a ballot vote.  He does not cast a deciding vote, even if his vote would affect the result, since that would interfere with the chair's prerogative of doing so.  If a member feels that he cannot properly forgo these rights in order to serve as parliamentarian, he should not accept that position."

[Joshua Katz]

I'm not aware of a rule that prohibits it, but having your representative be the Parliamentarian has two difficulties.  First, assuming all goes as it should, you will not have a representative who speaks for you and votes according to your interests, since the Parliamentarian will neither speak in debate nor vote (nor make motions).  Second, even if all goes as it should, despite you losing representation, others will suspect that your caucus has an unfair advantage.

[Richard Brown]

I agree with the other responses in that if RONR is your authority, the parliamentarian should not make motions, debate or vote except when it is a ballot vote. However, if he is a member of the body, he cannot be prevented from doing so, although he would be violating the rule in RONR.

If the board is in agreement, however, there are two alternatives. First, rather than appointing someone as the official Parliamentarian, the President can ask him to serve unofficially as the board's"experienced member" who the president can call upon for advice as mentioned at the top of page 254 of RONR .

A second alternative is to adopt a Special Rule of Order which permits the parliamentarian to participate the same as all other members can.

It's a little hard for me to follow exactly what your situation is regarding the parliamentarian, but it seems the parliamentarian is automatically a member of the board. If that is the case, it might be that the drafters of the bylaws expected the parliamentarian to participate fully. One might question why he is made a member of the board if his participation is severely limited. That will be a matter of bylaws interpretation, which is something only your organization can do.

[DJGarvin]

Thank you, I feel the same as I sited the RONR text, however when a motion was brought up at the last meeting, it was stated by the person that should be replaced that it has always been done that way and no problem has occurred.

Richard, the Parliamentarian is an appointed position by the chair of the Board. The Caucus Representative to the Board is elected by the Caucus, the motion that was made is that since the individual was appointed a Parliamentarian to the Board they can't & shouldn't be elected by the Caucus as Caucus Board Representative

[Joshua Katz]

Well, I do not agree that they can't be your representative.  However, there's no reason for a motion to remove the person, however that is done under your rules, to include a reason.  I am puzzled why anyone would think that the question of removing your board representative should be put before the board, but maybe I'm missing something.  I agree with Mr. Brown that it is odd for bylaws to make a Parliamentarian a member of the board.