Quietstorm Posted February 6, 2017 at 07:46 PM Report Share Posted February 6, 2017 at 07:46 PM Good day. Hope this will not be too confusing. Our organization has, over the past 6 years, has allowed for a person from our "sister organization" of retired members to be appointed to our Board. It states in our bylaws that"one of the Directors shall be elected from the Retired membership"...At the time of this addition to our bylaws it was "understood" by all that the "Retired membership" meant our sister organization. Now there are some who are not happy with that interpretation and are attempting to argue that there should be "a special election only for retirees (who are not members of our sister organization) but retired members of our main organization. Just an FYI, we recently had elections for offices and notices along with letters of intent were mailed to ALL members, including the aforementioned retirees (who are not members of our sister organization) but retired members of our main organization). Only ONE submitted their letter of intent. 1. There is nothing in our bylaws relative to a special election "unless there are vacancies that must be filled within 90 days after the election". We have 5 one year seats, 2 two year seats, one 3 year seat, and one 2 year seat reserved for a past President, if he/she did not run (again) or win the new election. Our bylaws state the Board is to be comprised of 9 seats (the tenth from the Retired members (sister organization) 2. Based upon the "past practice" can I fight this attempt of the few who are attempting to change things for their own personal gain? Thanks in advance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hieu H. Huynh Posted February 6, 2017 at 07:53 PM Report Share Posted February 6, 2017 at 07:53 PM Ultimately it is up to your organization to interpret your bylaws. Perhaps the bylaws could be amended to address the matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quietstorm Posted February 6, 2017 at 08:32 PM Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2017 at 08:32 PM Thanks for the response. In the meantime is there anything in Robert's Rules that may directly address "past practice". Thanks again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted February 6, 2017 at 08:34 PM Report Share Posted February 6, 2017 at 08:34 PM 1 minute ago, Quietstorm said: Thanks for the response. In the meantime is there anything in Robert's Rules that may directly address "past practice". Thanks again Yes; it's on page 19 of RONR (11th ed.). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted February 8, 2017 at 08:13 AM Report Share Posted February 8, 2017 at 08:13 AM On 2/6/2017 at 2:46 PM, Quietstorm said: 5 one year seats, 2 two year seats, one 3 year seat, and one [conditional -- emphasis mine -- I mean Gary's "mine", not Firestorm's "mine I mean I wrote "conditional," not -- spik it, just finish the sentence] 2 year seat How do you fit 5 + 2 + 3 and maybe (hence "conditional," but let's not go back there) another IPP, onto a nine-seat board? (Not that the issue hinges on this.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts