Rules for when President and Vice President cannot lead the meeting

[ras]

What is the procedure for when the current president and vice president will not be at the meeting to lead it. Bylaws account from the VP to stand in when Pres is not there but has nothing for when both are not there.  

I am thinking that a previous president preside the meeting. Does there need to be motion presented to handle this? 

Next time we ratify the bylaws which is every 5 years we will include a clause to handle this situation.

Thank you for your guidance

[Joshua Katz]

The Secretary calls the meeting to order, and presides over the election of a chair pro tem, who then presides for that meeting.

[George Mervosh]

On 5/6/2022 at 1:35 PM, ras said:

What is the procedure for when the current president and vice president will not be at the meeting to lead it. Bylaws account from the VP to stand in when Pres is not there but has nothing for when both are not there.  

I am thinking that a previous president preside the meeting. Does there need to be motion presented to handle this? 

Next time we ratify the bylaws which is every 5 years we will include a clause to handle this situation.

Thank you for your guidance

"If neither the president nor any vice-president is present, the secretary—or in the secretary's absence some other member—calls the meeting to order, and the assembly immediately elects a chairman pro tem to preside during that session. Such office is terminated by the entrance of the president or a vice-president, or by the adoption of a motion to “declare the chair vacant and proceed to elect a new chairman” (see 62:11)."  RONR (12th ed.), 47:11 3) 

You can certainly nominate a previous president to preside for this meeting.  The assembly makes the final decision.  Since there is a rule in RONR, there should be no need to amend the bylaws to cover this matter.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 5/6/2022 at 1:35 PM, ras said:

What is the procedure for when the current president and vice president will not be at the meeting to lead it. Bylaws account from the VP to stand in when Pres is not there but has nothing for when both are not there.  

I am thinking that a previous president preside the meeting. Does there need to be motion presented to handle this? 

Next time we ratify the bylaws which is every 5 years we will include a clause to handle this situation.

Thank you for your guidance

The situation is already handled nicely by the rules in RONR, so I would not lock anything into the bylaws and risk unintended consequences.  Suppose the previous president was voted out for doing a bad job?  Wouldn't you rather have the flexibility to choose someone else?

[ras]

On 5/6/2022 at 12:18 PM, George Mervosh said:

"If neither the president nor any vice-president is present, the secretary—or in the secretary's absence some other member—calls the meeting to order, and the assembly immediately elects a chairman pro tem to preside during that session. Such office is terminated by the entrance of the president or a vice-president, or by the adoption of a motion to “declare the chair vacant and proceed to elect a new chairman” (see 62:11)."  RONR (12th ed.), 47:11 3) 

You can certainly nominate a previous president to preside for this meeting.  The assembly makes the final decision.  Since there is a rule in RONR, there should be no need to amend the bylaws to cover this matter.

Do I understand correctly that we can do this nominate a previous president with the members agreeing to lead the meeting without have to do the RONR process with the Secreatry?  Thank you

[Joshua Katz]

On 5/6/2022 at 4:54 PM, ras said:

Do I understand correctly that we can do this nominate a previous president with the members agreeing to lead the meeting without have to do the RONR process with the Secreatry?  Thank you

No. You can nominate and elect a past president (or someone else) to preside, but first, the body needs to come to order, and, after nomination, it needs to hold an election. (If there is only one nominee, in this instance, the 'chair' will declare the nominee elected, but you need a 'chair' to do that - which role will be filled by the Secretary, who calls the meeting to order.)

[Josh Martin]

On 5/6/2022 at 12:35 PM, ras said:

What is the procedure for when the current president and vice president will not be at the meeting to lead it. Bylaws account from the VP to stand in when Pres is not there but has nothing for when both are not there.  

Next time we ratify the bylaws which is every 5 years we will include a clause to handle this situation.

There is no need to add a clause to handle this situation. RONR already has the assembly covered.

On 5/6/2022 at 12:35 PM, ras said:

I am thinking that a previous president preside the meeting. Does there need to be motion presented to handle this? 

In the event the President and the Vice President are both absent, the Secretary (or any member, if the Secretary is also absent) would call the meeting to order and ask for nominations for a Chairman Pro Tempore. Ultimately, a majority vote is required for election. The person the assembly chooses certainly could be a previous President, but this is not required. The person elected as Chairman Pro Tempore would then preside for the remainder of the meeting.

Edited May 6, 2022 at 09:44 PM by Josh Martin

[Gary Novosielski]

On 5/6/2022 at 4:54 PM, ras said:

Do I understand correctly that we can do this nominate a previous president with the members agreeing to lead the meeting without have to do the RONR process with the Secreatry?  Thank you

No.  Read @George Mervosh's reply more carefully:

"...the secretary...call[s] the meeting to order, and the assembly immediately elects a chairman pro tem...." which could be the previous president.  If there is only one nominee (for example, the previous president) then you can simply declare them elected by unanimous consent, and they will preside for the rest of that meeting.

[Gary Novosielski]

Here's a quick aside: 

62:11 states that in the case of the regular chair, a motion to declare the chair vacant is not in order.  Is it correct to interpret the following sentence to say that a motion to "Suspend the rules and declare the chair vacant" would be in order?  Or is some other form more desirable?

[Richard Brown]

On 5/6/2022 at 5:06 PM, Gary Novosielski said:

Here's a quick aside: 

62:11 states that in the case of the regular chair, a motion to declare the chair vacant is not in order.  Is it correct to interpret the following sentence to say that a motion to "Suspend the rules and declare the chair vacant" would be in order?  Or is some other form more desirable?

Gary, why are you bringing that up here? That is in the section of RONR on disciplinary proceedings which is not an issue here. I suggest, respectfully, that if you want to pursue that diversion, that you start a new thread re declaring the chair vacant. I believe it will only cause confusion within this current thread. 

Edited May 8, 2022 at 11:08 PM by Richard Brown
Added second sentence

[Gary Novosielski]

On 5/8/2022 at 7:04 PM, Richard Brown said:

Gary, why are you bringing that up here? That is in the section of RONR on disciplinary proceedings which is not an issue here. I suggest, respectfully, that if you want to pursue that diversion, that you start a new thread re declaring the chair vacant. I believe it will only cause confusion within this current thread. 

I see your point.  No, I did not mean to imply that it was an issue in this thread.  I just ran across it and wondered about the form.