Putting the question

[Guest Kelly]

If someone moved to nominate a person for the vacate seat on the board. It was seconded. The chair open discussion on the nominee. Then the chair said, "practicing Roberts rules I think we should watch for a certain in the future before voting on a nominee. And would not put it to a vote. Is that within the rules?

[Guest Kelly]

On 1/20/2024 at 6:30 PM, Guest Kelly said:

If someone moved to nominate a person for the vacate seat on the board. It was seconded. The chair open discussion on the nominee. Then the chair said, "practicing Roberts rules I think we should watch for a certain in the future before voting on a nominee. And would not put it to a vote. Is that within the rules?

 If someone moved to nominate a person for the vacate seat on the board. It was seconded. The chair open discussion on the nominee. Then the chair said, "practicing Roberts rules I think we should WAIT (not watch)  for a certain in the future before voting on a nominee. And would not put it to a vote. Is that within the rules?

 

 

 

[Gary Novosielski]

On 1/20/2024 at 9:39 PM, Guest Kelly said:

 If someone moved to nominate a person for the vacate seat on the board. It was seconded. The chair open discussion on the nominee. Then the chair said, "practicing Roberts rules I think we should WAIT (not watch)  for a certain in the future before voting on a nominee. And would not put it to a vote. Is that within the rules?

Possibly.  It depends on a number of things.  Was this a board meeting at which the person was nominated, a board meeting or a membership meeting?  Was the body that was meeting the one with the power to fill vacancies, according to your bylaws?

In any case, if the member moved to nominate the person, that does not mean a vote will be taken then.  It requires previous notice to elect someone to office to fill a vacancy.   I'm not sure why the chair did not handle this as a call for nominations rather than waiting for someone to "move" a nomination, but I suppose no harm was done.  Nominations do not require a second.  If previous notice of this vote was made at this meeting additional nominations and a vote could take place at the next one. 

But I'm assuming a lot here.  What do your bylaws say about filling vacancies?

 

Edited January 21, 2024 at 02:54 PM by Gary Novosielski
as shown

[Rob Elsman]

On 1/20/2024 at 8:39 PM, Guest Kelly said:

I think we should WAIT (not watch)  for a certain in the future

This does not make any sense.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 1/21/2024 at 6:24 AM, Rob Elsman said:

This does not make any sense.

It was a correction of the quote of the chair, striking watch and inserting wait.  Whether what the chair said makes sense is another matter.  If the chair was enforcing the rule requiring previous notice for elections, then it would.

[Josh Martin]

On 1/20/2024 at 8:39 PM, Guest Kelly said:

Then the chair said, "practicing Roberts rules I think we should WAIT (not watch)  for a certain in the future before voting on a nominee. And would not put it to a vote.

I feel like there must be some words missing here, particularly after the word "certain". Perhaps the word "time?" The sentence as written does not make any sense.

On 1/20/2024 at 8:30 PM, Guest Kelly said:

Is that within the rules?

I don't fully understand the above sentence, so I'm not sure.

Speaking generally, the rules pertaining to filling a vacancy in office are as follows:

"The power to appoint or elect persons to any office or board carries with it the power to accept their resignations, and also the power to fill any vacancy occurring in it, unless the bylaws expressly provide otherwise. In the case of a society whose bylaws confer upon its executive board full power and authority over the society's affairs between meetings of the society's assembly (as in the example in 56:43) without reserving to the society itself the exclusive right to fill vacancies, the executive board is empowered to accept resignations and fill vacancies between meetings of the society's assembly. For particular vacancies, see 47:22 (president-elect), and 47:28–30 and 56:32 (president and vice-presidents). See also 13:23 (vacancies in a committee).

Notice of filling a vacancy in an office (including a vacancy in an executive board or executive committee) must always be given to the members of the body that will elect the person to fill it, unless the bylaws or special rules of order clearly provide otherwise." RONR (12th ed.) 47:57-58

Assuming that:

• The board is the body empowered to fill the vacancy in question; and
• Previous notice had been given of the election to fill the vacancy; and
• There are no other rules in the organization's bylaws governing this matter which would require waiting for a certain time in the future,

Then it would seem to me the chair acted improperly.

Edited January 21, 2024 at 07:19 PM by Josh Martin

[Rob Elsman]

"Certain" is an adjective that needs the noun or pronoun it is supposed to modify. So, where's the noun?  Certain what?  What are we waiting for?

Edited January 21, 2024 at 07:55 PM by Rob Elsman

[Guest Kelly]

Thank you, Josh Martin, you answer was very helpful.

It is a school board. A special meeting was called to fill the vacant seat. They interview two replacements for a board member who stepped down. Once the interview was done. The chair said, I will start it out with any nominations. One board member said, I nominate (the persons name). Another board member said,  I second it. The chair said, Okay, we have a nomination for (the persons name). Then the chair said, "Any discussion". After a bit of discussion, the chair said, any other discussion. I'm practicing Roberts Rules before I Speak last. One member wanted to know if other nominations were going to be asked for. The Chair said, It depends how the vote goes. The Chair went on to share his thoughts. He personally saw the process as rushed. After a couple more thoughts, the chair said, I'm not going to affirm on either one at this time. 

[Link to video deleted by moderator]

Edited January 21, 2024 at 10:24 PM by Shmuel Gerber
External link deleted

[Joshua Katz]

On 1/21/2024 at 3:41 PM, Guest Kelly said:

A special meeting was called to fill the vacant seat.

That changes things, as notice was provided, and the vacancy probably could have been filled at that meeting.

On 1/21/2024 at 3:41 PM, Guest Kelly said:

After a bit of discussion, the chair said, any other discussion. I'm practicing Roberts Rules before I Speak last.

I don't know what the chair meant by that.

On 1/21/2024 at 3:41 PM, Guest Kelly said:

One member wanted to know if other nominations were going to be asked for. The Chair said, It depends how the vote goes.

Well that's mostly wrong. You finish nominations, then hold the election, at least in a democratic society. However, if there is no majority (not applicable here), you might reopen nominations, so there's some sense in which what he said is true. But, unless the bylaws call for a balloted vote, with one nominee for one position there was no need to vote, the chair should have declared the person elected. But it also seems the chair cut off nominations for no particular reason after one nominee. In short, this is a mess and hard to unravel.

 

On 1/21/2024 at 3:41 PM, Guest Kelly said:

After a couple more thoughts, the chair said, I'm not going to affirm on either one at this time. 

I don't know what that means, either. The election belongs to the body, not the chair. It's not up to him to "affirm" anything.

[Atul Kapur]

On 1/21/2024 at 12:41 PM, Guest Kelly said:

The chair said, I will start it out with any nominations. One board member said, I nominate (the persons name). Another board member said,  I second it. The chair said, Okay, we have a nomination for (the persons name). Then the chair said, "Any discussion"

Two different processes were confused here. Whichever process was used, it should have been completed at that time.

The "nomination" and second and call for discussion suggest that this was being handled as a motion "That x be appointed to fill the vacancy." After the discussion was completed, the chair should have put the question to a vote. If it were defeated, then someone could make another motion to appoint someone else.

The other method is an election. Nominations are made when an election is being held. The chair calls for nominationS, as many as people wish to make. After all nominations have been made, then the vote is taken until a winner is chosen. (Debate can occur while nominations are open. See 46:28.)

Check your rules to see which method you should be using and use that. Don't mix the two up.

[Josh Martin]

Thank you. I appreciate this clarification. Based on these additional facts...

On 1/21/2024 at 2:41 PM, Guest Kelly said:

I'm practicing Roberts Rules before I Speak last.

To the extent the chair is suggesting that Robert's Rules provides the chair speaks last, this is not correct. While the chair may speak in debate under the small board rules, nothing suggests he speaks last, except in the case of debate on an Appeal.

On 1/21/2024 at 2:41 PM, Guest Kelly said:

One member wanted to know if other nominations were going to be asked for. The Chair said, It depends how the vote goes. The Chair went on to share his thoughts. He personally saw the process as rushed. After a couple more thoughts, the chair said, I'm not going to affirm on either one at this time. 

Well, the chair is free to "see" the process as he wishes, and the chair is free to vote how he wishes (or to abstain), but the chair can't simply refuse to take the vote.

If the chair wished to delay filling the vacancy, he could move to postpone the matter to the next regular meeting. A majority vote is required for adoption. But the chair can't make that decision on his own.

I will note that this is a school board, and there may well be additional rules on these subjects in the board's rules or applicable law. Such rules would take precedence over RONR, and you may wish to consult the board's clerks and attorneys on that matter. I am generally doubtful, however, that the rules would authorize the chair to unilaterally postpone the election.

Edited January 22, 2024 at 01:30 PM by Josh Martin

[Guest Kelly]

Are there any suggestions on how I can correct this? 

[Josh Martin]

On 1/22/2024 at 11:34 AM, Guest Kelly said:

Are there any suggestions on how I can correct this? 

As I understand the facts, the position remains vacant at this time. If so, I would try again to fill the position at the next regular meeting, or at a special meeting called for the purpose. If the chair again attempts to refuse to permit the board to vote on this matter, raise a Point of Order, followed by an Appeal if necessary.

Edited January 22, 2024 at 05:37 PM by Josh Martin

[laser158689]

How was the "election" disposed of (Postponed?  Committed?  Something?)  Did the special meeting adjourn (finally) without a vote?  Were there other main motions after the "election"?