Election of Board of Directors

[Guest Carolyn Rutkowski]

During the May meeting of our HOA, I raised a point of order that the proposed slate of officers to be elected for next term could not take place at this meeting because according to the HOA Bylaws 1.) the nominating committee did not report its nominees prior to the election in the newsletter and 2.) the slate of officers violated term limits which state that officers shall serve for a term of one (1) year and may be re-elected to that same position for a maximum of one (1) additional consecutive term of office.

One member raised the motion to "Suspend the rules" and move forward with the vote for the slate of those nominees that were not affected by the term limits. I objected again and the President then said to all that a motion is on the floor and asked for a vote which passed unanimously over my objection. The President-Elect remained silent and did not rule on this, but should have, according to the HOA Bylaws which state, " The President-Elect shall interpret Robert's Rules of Order if questions of parliamentary procedure arise during the regular meetings."

My understanding is that you cannot suspend the rules for a bylaw according to Roberts Rules. Does the above action negate the vote that was improperly acted upon by the President that erroneously elected this slate of officers so that a new election must take place and that the old officers are reverted back to their original positions as if there were no election at all in May?

Please advise.

Thank you

[Robert B Fish]

The election is null and void because:

1) The requirements in your bylaws for notice were not met. This is a provision that cannot be suspended, even by unanimous vote, unless the bylaws provide for suspending it. See p244, item (e).

2) The rule that imposed term limits also cannot be suspended unless the bylaws provide for suspending it. See p244, item a.

Just to clarify, and election is, in essence, a motion "that ___ be elected to office."

Also, unfortunately we cannot force your HOA to follow its own bylaws. However, they are probably subject to state code and that probably requires they do so. You might need to contact an attorney for further action.

-Bob

[Kim Goldsworthy]

During the May meeting of our HOA, I raised a point of order that the proposed slate of officers to be elected for next term could not take place at this meeting because according to the HOA Bylaws

1.) the nominating committee did not report its nominees prior to the election in the newsletter and

2.) the slate of officers violated term limits which state that officers shall serve for a term of one (1) year and may be re-elected to that same position for a maximum of one (1) additional consecutive term of office.

Reason #1 is not a valid parliamentary reason.

Reason #2 is valid, assuming your excerpt fully describes the term limit rule of your bylaws.

One member raised the motion to "Suspend the rules" and move forward with the vote for the slate of those nominees that were not affected by the term limits.

You can indeed do the election for those people who are not affected by your term-limit rule.

I objected again and the President then said to all that a motion is on the floor and asked for a vote which passed unanimously over my objection.

The President-Elect remained silent and did not rule on this, but should have, according to the HOA Bylaws which state, "The President-Elect shall interpret Robert's Rules of Order if questions of parliamentary procedure arise during the regular meetings."

A vote on what? - (a.) The suspension of the rules, or the (b.) election itself?

My understanding is that you cannot suspend the rules for a bylaw according to Roberts Rules.

False, sometimes. Some rules embedded in one's bylaws are suspendable.

Does the above action negate the vote that was improperly acted upon by the President that erroneously elected this slate of officers so that a new election must take place and that the old officers are reverted back to their original positions as if there were no election at all in May?

The term-limit guys are out. - A point of order could be raised at any time during their term in office.

The non-term-limit affected guys are in.

[Guest dan]

During the May meeting of our HOA, I raised a point of order that the proposed slate of officers to be elected for next term could not take place at this meeting because according to the HOA Bylaws 1.) the nominating committee did not report its nominees prior to the election in the newsletter and 2.) the slate of officers violated term limits which state that officers shall serve for a term of one (1) year and may be re-elected to that same position for a maximum of one (1) additional consecutive term of office.

One member raised the motion to "Suspend the rules" and move forward with the vote for the slate of those nominees that were not affected by the term limits. I objected again and the President then said to all that a motion is on the floor and asked for a vote which passed unanimously over my objection. The President-Elect remained silent and did not rule on this, but should have, according to the HOA Bylaws which state, " The President-Elect shall interpret Robert's Rules of Order if questions of parliamentary procedure arise during the regular meetings."

My understanding is that you cannot suspend the rules for a bylaw according to Roberts Rules. Does the above action negate the vote that was improperly acted upon by the President that erroneously elected this slate of officers so that a new election must take place and that the old officers are reverted back to their original positions as if there were no election at all in May?

Please advise.

Thank you

You seem to know what you are saying. The rest of these folks seem to be idiots who just want to just want to make up the rules as they go.

[Josh Martin]

1) The requirements in your bylaws for notice were not met. This is a provision that cannot be suspended, even by unanimous vote, unless the bylaws provide for suspending it. See p244, item (e).

Mr. Fish, unless the Bylaws prohibit nominations from the floor and write-in votes, I don't believe the violation of the newsletter rule would cause a continuing breach.

With the facts as presented, I agree with Mr. Goldsworthy that the violation of the term limits causes a continuing breach, but the failure to put the nominees in the newsletter does not.