Voting Member Posted May 10, 2018 at 02:50 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 at 02:50 PM My organization voted two years ago to have new officers take office on a specific date each year. The Parliamentarian has yet to publish a new copy of the standing rules but we have referenced this vote each year when discussing officer changeover and it has been our accepted practice for over forty years. Now, the incoming board wants to take office immediately and the claim is that a motion expires after one year. This was a duly made motion that was seconded and received a unanimous vote of the membership but again, the Parliamentarian has yet to publish new standing rules. I have never heard that a passed motion expires after one year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Who's Coming to Dinner Posted May 10, 2018 at 02:58 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 at 02:58 PM There is no such rule. Winning candidates take office at the beginning of the term defined in your bylaws. It is possible that your two-year-old motion is null and void if it conflicts with the bylaws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted May 10, 2018 at 03:21 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 at 03:21 PM The second footnote on page 111 of RONR (11th ed.) tells us that "Unless an adopted main motion specifies a time for the termination of its effect, it continues in force until it is rescinded." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Katz Posted May 10, 2018 at 03:29 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 at 03:29 PM Is no one else concerned about the use of a standing rule to modify terms of office? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Who's Coming to Dinner Posted May 10, 2018 at 04:09 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 at 04:09 PM 37 minutes ago, Joshua Katz said: Is no one else concerned about the use of a standing rule to modify terms of office? I've seen enough querents here use "standing rule" to cover any kind of rule, so I make no assumption. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Zev Posted May 10, 2018 at 09:54 PM Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 at 09:54 PM 6 hours ago, Joshua Katz said: Is no one else concerned about the use of a standing rule to modify terms of office? I am. Shouldn't when officers assume their duties be defined in the bylaws? Standing rules can be modified almost at will. Is this the type of thing they should be doing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voting Member Posted May 11, 2018 at 12:01 AM Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2018 at 12:01 AM My question really is more about motions expiring, rather than the content of the motion, but thanks for the feedback! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted May 11, 2018 at 07:27 AM Report Share Posted May 11, 2018 at 07:27 AM A motion does not expire, unless the content of the motion says it does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted May 11, 2018 at 03:32 PM Report Share Posted May 11, 2018 at 03:32 PM 15 hours ago, Voting Member said: My question really is more about motions expiring, rather than the content of the motion, but thanks for the feedback! But you should be concerned with whether the motion itself is valid. Only an amendment to the bylaws is sufficient to change the time at when the officers take office, unless your bylaws provide otherwise. A standing rule which conflicts with your bylaws was invalid and is null and void, which makes the question of when it expires moot. If the bylaws are silent on when officers take office, they take office immediately upon election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts