Filling vacancies

[Guest Thomas]

The question is the order of filling vacancies in a body.  

The rules of our body are that a member continues to serve until replaced.  

However, what if there are existing vacancies in the body?  Which vacancy is filled first?  As new members are appointed, should a "truly vacant" seat be filled before removing a member who continues to serve but whose term has expired?

In my view (and as I thought was in the rules, but I cannot find it), an empty seat would be filled before a non-empty seat.

[Hieu H. Huynh]

What are these positions (officers, board, or committee members)? What exactly is the term of office? Are you filling vacancies and electing new members?

[Guest Thomas]

The question concerns the members of a volunteer municipal committee.  The members apply, are nominated by the mayor, and approved by the town council.  There are existing members and existing vacancies.  The committee has overlapping three-year terms.  After three years, the member must reapply.

The question is, when a new member is appointed, will he replace an existing but term-expired member first or fill an existing vacancy first?

[Hieu H. Huynh]

Do the positions have different term lengths? Couldn't someone apply to the position with the term length remaining that is desired?

[Kim Goldsworthy]

>> The question is, when a new member is appointed,

>> will he replace an existing but term-expired member first, or fill an existing vacancy first?

***

That is to be determined by the appointing body.

There is no "default" order: (a.) fill vacancies; (b.) elect normal cycle seats.

If you hold any kind of election, you will do the filling simultaneously.

You will nominate people for #a, and you will nominate people for #b. Then you conduct an election.

This usually is not seen, because the act of filling vacancies typically is conducted in-between regular election cycles. So your "problem" never occurs, in 95% of all organizations. (It is rare to have a death or resignation timed so well during the nomination phase of the election cycle.)

Since you do have this scenario, then just conduct nominations for all seats, separately, and conduct one election, with the two sets of candidates separated by seat.

 

[Richard Brown]

My take is a bit different from Mr. Goldsworthy's. If the committee is supposed to be a certain size and has vacancies, those vacancies should be filled as soon as possible. 

It seems to me that should take priority over replacing existing members. However, I'm not aware of a rule in RONR that actually requires it. Check your own rules, ordinances and applicable state law.

I read guest Thomas' original post as saying the members don't serve fixed terms and they don't have regular elections, but rather just replace members from time to time. I view filling vacancies as more important than replacing existing members.

[Transpower]

I think the approval of the town council should be done simultaneously for all open seats.

 

[Richard Brown]

4 hours ago, Transpower said:

I think the approval of the town council should be done simultaneously for all open seats.

I agree that it would probably be best to fill all of the vacancies at the same time if that can be done, but I don't see it as being a necessity. Let's not forget, however, that the committee  members do not serve fixed terms but serve indefinitely until they are replaced. There are no naturally occurring vacancies. They all all occur only by death or resignation.

[Dan Honemann]

18 minutes ago, Richard Brown said:

I agree that it would probably be best to fill all of the vacancies at the same time if that can be done, but I don't see it as being a necessity. Let's not forget, however, that the committee  members do not serve fixed terms but serve indefinitely until they are replaced. There are no naturally occurring vacancies. They all all occur only by death or resignation.

If I read the facts correctly, the committee members do serve for a fixed term, or until their successors are elected.

[Richard Brown]

37 minutes ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

If I read the facts correctly, the committee members do serve for a fixed term, or until their successors are elected.

Perhaps. I reread the initial post. I took the second sentence to mean that there are no fixed terms and that members serve until replaced. But, a later sentence does make reference to terms expiring .  

In retrospect, you are probably correct.

[Gary c Tesser]

So was the OP's question answered, and if so, was it by Kim Goldsworthy's final sentence?

[Gary c Tesser]

(This always niggles me)

[Guest Thomas]

Hello again.

Please review the third entry (mine).  The committee started with staggered one-, two-, and three-year appointments.  By now, all are three-year appointments.  At the end of three years, the appointment ends and one is expected to reapply.  But please recall that the municipal rules are that members serve until replaced.  The committee is not at full strength.  Someone retired and decided to resign from the committee as well.  Someone else moved (you have to be a resident).  Someone else had a job transfer.  There are existing vacancies.  Replacement members are not readily available.  Replacement is done on a rolling basis.  When the mayor has a new candidate, he sends the name to the town council for approval and appointment.

There are also limits for the number of members from any one political party.  That limit is just over half (four of a seven-member committee; five of a nine-member committee; six of an eleven-member committee).  I am of the non-dominant local party.

My term has expired.  I am serving until replaced (in my view).  I am having a dispute with the mayor.  I believe he would not reappointment me if I reapplied.  I believe he would like me to go away, but I am serving until replaced.  He has sent me a letter thanking me for my service that the town clerk believes has ended my membership.  (She is incorrect.)

Given the party-membership limit, I say he has to fill the existing vacancies with other candidates from the non-dominant local party (or any other, for that matter (we're full up on dominant-party members)) before I would get bumped.  In other words, he cannot choose to fill my otherwise-occupied seat on the committee before filling the vacant seats.

Yes?

[Dan Honemann]

I don't think you will find anything in RONR which says that your Mayor cannot nominate someone to fill your seat (your term having expired) before nominating persons to fill seats that have been vacated by resignation, moving away, etc.

[Gary c Tesser]

1 hour ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

I don't think you will find anything in RONR which says that your Mayor cannot nominate someone to fill your seat (your term having expired) before nominating persons to fill seats that have been vacated by resignation, moving away, etc.

By now I have lost track of whether this will be a bylaws-interpretation question or not, but:  if Guest Thomas is not replaced, doesn't he continue to serve (indefinitely) (per Mr Honemann's first post here)?

8 hours ago, Guest Thomas said:

 I believe he would not reappoint me if I reapplied.

9 hours ago, Guest Thomas said:

Replacement members are not readily available

 

So what?  You serve until replaced:  who will he replace you with when he has nobody?

9 hours ago, Guest Thomas said:

Replacement is done on a rolling basis.

Uh oh.  What does this mean??!?

OK, I don't think I can come up with an RONR citation, for most anything in this thread, which means, yes, this is a bylaws-interpretation question, and not about RONR.  But it has been invigorating; my thanks to all participants.

[Guest Thomas]

Hello again. 

With a push for new members, there are now new to-be members, who are coming on board informally and participating in all but voting.  I will be pushed off as they are appointed.  (Many hands make light work.)

However, the new chairman still wants me on the committee (not that the old one didn't) and will be seeking to expand the number of seats on the committee to include everyone we now have.  After that happens (a few months), I will reapply.  (The chairman will insist I be appointed.)

Thank you all for your interest.