Discussion during election of officers

[Martina Brown]

Is discussion allowed during the election of officers?  During nominations, I asked if discussion was allowed and I was told no. Here is our policy:

Purpose: To establish the basic structure for board organization.

The officers of the board of trustees are chairman, vice-chair, and secretary. Each officer will serve for a two-year term.

The officers are elected and sworn in at the first regularly scheduled meeting following the election of new board members.

Officers will be elected by the majority vote of the board. The board will use secret ballots to elect officers, unless a board member requests that the board record votes by name.

The superintendent will collect and count the ballots in the presence of the board. The board chair of the preceding year (or another officer of the board) will immediately verify the vote count.

The new chair will then preside, conduct the elections of vice-chair and secretary, and collect and count the ballots in the presence of the board.

Vacancies in the above-mentioned offices will be filled as outlined in law.

 

[Rob Elsman]

You were told wrong.  Nominations are debatable. RONR (12th ed.) 46:27-29.

[Martina Brown]

Thank you so much. Is there anything that can be done after the meeting has ended? 

[Guest Zev]

6 hours ago, Martina Brown said:

Is there anything that can be done after the meeting has ended?

Not really. Points of Order must be raised at the time the violation occurs. Unfortunately, now is too late. There is a vague possibility that this organization has some rule that specifies "...that debate on nominations be conducted at a different time or in a different manner." (RONR 12th ed. 46:29 on p.416.) I would double-check the bylaws. What you needed to have done is at the time the presiding officer indicated that debate was not in order to raise another Point Of Information and requested to know why debate was disallowed at that time. I do not know where these "policies" come from, but it does not appear as though they have any bearing on debate during nominations or why debate would have been postponed to a different time.

[Dan Honemann]

On 12/5/2020 at 12:00 PM, Martina Brown said:

  During nominations, I asked if discussion was allowed and I was told no.

 

52 minutes ago, Guest Zev said:

 What you needed to have done is at the time the presiding officer indicated that debate was not in order to raise another Point Of Information and requested to know why debate was disallowed at that time. 

I don't think so.

According to RONR, it would appear that Ms. Brown should have attempted to speak in debate anyway, having received what appears to have been an erroneous response to her parliamentary inquiry, and then raised a point of order if the chair denied her the right to do so (RONR, 12th ed., 33:3-5).

[Martina Brown]

Thank you so much for your time and knowledge.