JDee Posted May 24, 2017 at 03:22 PM Report Share Posted May 24, 2017 at 03:22 PM Hello All, I have a question as to whether or not an additional language to suspend an election of officers is needed or legit if your bylaws stated election of officers shall take place at a specific time each year. Better can an organization include additional language in its bylaws to address suspension of election tell a later date if the bylaws already states election must take place at a specific time each year? Do the specific language needs to be revised in order for the suspension can be added? Thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted May 24, 2017 at 03:46 PM Report Share Posted May 24, 2017 at 03:46 PM JDee, I'm having a hard time understanding exactly what you are asking. Can you try to clarify for us exactly what it is you or your organization want to do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDee Posted May 24, 2017 at 03:52 PM Author Report Share Posted May 24, 2017 at 03:52 PM Members of my organization would like to have to right to suspend an election (let's say instead of having an election in November, we can suspend it until December or so on). but there's a current language said it shall take place in november Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted May 24, 2017 at 04:14 PM Report Share Posted May 24, 2017 at 04:14 PM 19 minutes ago, JDee said: Members of my organization would like to have to right to suspend an election (let's say instead of having an election in November, we can suspend it until December or so on). but there's a current language said it shall take place in november No, but while the election is pending in November, your group can establish and adjourned meeting to take place before the next regular meeting in December and then postpone the election to that adjourned meeting. See RONR (11th ed.), p. 242ff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDee Posted May 24, 2017 at 04:16 PM Author Report Share Posted May 24, 2017 at 04:16 PM I don't understand why motion to adjourn should be used..... can't we just put new language in bylaws to suspend any election if we feel the candidates are not up to par thus will provide with enough time to look at other potential candidates? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted May 24, 2017 at 04:35 PM Report Share Posted May 24, 2017 at 04:35 PM 16 minutes ago, JDee said: I don't understand why motion to adjourn should be used..... can't we just put new language in bylaws to suspend any election if we feel the candidates are not up to par thus will provide with enough time to look at other potential candidates? It's not a motion to adjourn. It's establishing an adjourned meeting which in essence is a continuation of the November meeting. I suggest you read the cited pages. If your group wants to adopt bylaw language to help with whatever the problem is, that's fine, but until they do, an adjourned meeting is an option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDee Posted May 24, 2017 at 04:42 PM Author Report Share Posted May 24, 2017 at 04:42 PM I understanding we can adjourn a meeting but my question was pertaining as to whether or not we can include bylaws language to suspend an election thus giving us the option needed when a situation arises when the members on the ballot are not suitable or something happen and a member on the ballot is being investigated. I hope I am more clear now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted May 24, 2017 at 05:23 PM Report Share Posted May 24, 2017 at 05:23 PM 40 minutes ago, JDee said: I understanding we can adjourn a meeting Once again, please read the cited pages. 40 minutes ago, JDee said: my question was pertaining as to whether or not we can include bylaws language to suspend an election thus giving us the option needed when a situation arises when the members on the ballot are not suitable or something happen and a member on the ballot is being investigated. Of course Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted May 24, 2017 at 05:38 PM Report Share Posted May 24, 2017 at 05:38 PM JDee, I don't think you understand what Mr. Mervosh is trying to tell you. When I can get on a computer in a few minutes I will try to explain further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted May 24, 2017 at 05:40 PM Report Share Posted May 24, 2017 at 05:40 PM JDee, do you have a copy of RONR? Any other books on parliamentary procedure? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted May 24, 2017 at 06:07 PM Report Share Posted May 24, 2017 at 06:07 PM (edited) 1 hour ago, JDee said: I understanding we can adjourn a meeting but my question was pertaining as to whether or not we can include bylaws language to suspend an election thus giving us the option needed when a situation arises when the members on the ballot are not suitable or something happen and a member on the ballot is being investigated. I hope I am more clear now... JDee, what Mr. Mervosh is suggesting is exactly what RONR (Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, 11th edition) says to do if for some reason the society desires to "postpone" the elections. A motion to set an "adjourned meeting" is not the same thing as simply adjourning. An "adjourned meeting" is, in essence, the continuation of the same meeting on a future date. I will cite the applicable provision from page 185 of RONR below, as I suspect you do not have a copy of it: "POSTPONEMENT OF A SUBJECT THAT THE BYLAWS SET FOR A PARTICULAR SESSION. A matter that the bylaws require to be attended to at a specified session, such as the election of officers, cannot, in advance and through a main motion, be postponed to another session. It can be taken up at any time when it is in order during the specified session (that is, either as originally convened or at any adjournment of it); and it can be postponed to an adjourned meeting in the manner explained above, after first adopting, if necessary, a motion to Fix the Time to Which to Adjourn. The adjourned meeting, as already stated, is a continuation of the same session. The procedure of postponing such a matter to an adjourned meeting is sometimes advisable, as in an annual meeting for the election of officers on a stormy night when, although a quorum is present, the attendance is abnormally small. If the matter has actually been taken up during the specified session as required, it also may be postponed beyond that session in accordance with the regular rules for the motion to Postpone. It is usually unwise to do so, however, unless completing it during the session proves impossible or impractical." As stated in the last paragraph of the quote above, you do have another option besides setting an adjourned meeting. You can simply postpone the elections to the next regular meeting (or to a special meeting), but if you are going to follow RONR, you must first actually take up the elections at the specified meeting and then have a member make a motion to postpone the completion of the elections until the next meeting. To first take up the elections at the meeting specified in the bylaws, the chair simply announces that "the election of officers is now the next order of business" or "The election of officers is now before the assembly". At that time, the elections are then before the assembly and any member can move to postpone the elections to the next meeting (provided it is within a quarterly time interval). The motion to postpone the elections cannot technically made until the elections are actually pending, that is, when the election is actually the item of business before the assembly. It cannot be moved before you get to that point in your order of business. It's the rule because your bylaws say the elections MUST be taken up at that particular meeting. So, you must take them up. You just don't have to complete them at that time. Understand now? Maybe? Edited May 24, 2017 at 06:10 PM by Richard Brown Typographical corrections Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDee Posted May 24, 2017 at 06:29 PM Author Report Share Posted May 24, 2017 at 06:29 PM Lol...yes I do. thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDee Posted May 25, 2017 at 12:20 PM Author Report Share Posted May 25, 2017 at 12:20 PM Now that we are about to review our bylaws, I much rather put the language for suspension in our bylaws. is that permissible according to RROR? if so how can I go about doing so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexis Hunt Posted May 25, 2017 at 12:54 PM Report Share Posted May 25, 2017 at 12:54 PM 32 minutes ago, JDee said: Now that we are about to review our bylaws, I much rather put the language for suspension in our bylaws. is that permissible according to RROR? if so how can I go about doing so? It's certainly permissible, since your bylaws take precedence over RONR. We do not provide advice for writing bylaws on this forum, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDee Posted May 25, 2017 at 01:02 PM Author Report Share Posted May 25, 2017 at 01:02 PM oh ok..thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted May 25, 2017 at 01:05 PM Report Share Posted May 25, 2017 at 01:05 PM 2 minutes ago, Alexis Hunt said: . . . . We do not provide advice for writing bylaws on this forum, however. Oh, but we do. Quite often , in fact. I would advise JDee to think long and hard before putting such language in the bylaws. As Mr. Mervosh and I have already pointed out, RONR already provides a method for postponing an election when necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDee Posted May 25, 2017 at 01:09 PM Author Report Share Posted May 25, 2017 at 01:09 PM Thank you very much Richard...I will definitely discuss Mr, Mervosh RONR directive with our committee. If they choose otherwise, how should go about including in our bylaws...I guess first order would be to amend the specific time language...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted May 25, 2017 at 06:52 PM Report Share Posted May 25, 2017 at 06:52 PM 5 hours ago, JDee said: Thank you very much Richard...I will definitely discuss Mr, Mervosh RONR directive with our committee. If they choose otherwise, how should go about including in our bylaws...I guess first order would be to amend the specific time language...? I would think so. 5 hours ago, Richard Brown said: Oh, but we do. Quite often , in fact. I would advise JDee to think long and hard before putting such language in the bylaws. As Mr. Mervosh and I have already pointed out, RONR already provides a method for postponing an election when necessary. Well, there may be advantages to placing it in the bylaws. Perhaps the society wants to have the ability to A.) postpone the election before it is actually pending and/or B.) postpone the election beyond the next regular meeting (or beyond a quarterly time interval). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted May 25, 2017 at 10:48 PM Report Share Posted May 25, 2017 at 10:48 PM 3 hours ago, Josh Martin said: I would think so. Well, there may be advantages to placing it in the bylaws. Perhaps the society wants to have the ability to A.) postpone the election before it is actually pending and/or B.) postpone the election beyond the next regular meeting (or beyond a quarterly time interval). Agreed. I'm concerned, though, about them just looking for a way to get around having to have elections and let the people currently in office just continue to serve. But, if that's what they want . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted May 26, 2017 at 06:28 PM Report Share Posted May 26, 2017 at 06:28 PM 19 hours ago, Richard Brown said: Agreed. I'm concerned, though, about them just looking for a way to get around having to have elections and let the people currently in office just continue to serve. But, if that's what they want . . . . If that is what they want, then they certainly would need a bylaws-level rule. I am inclined, however, to take the OP at his word that the rule is intended to permit the society to postpone the election until suitable candidates can be found. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDee Posted June 11, 2017 at 07:08 PM Author Report Share Posted June 11, 2017 at 07:08 PM Thank you guys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts