bdrbaker Posted August 5, 2010 at 01:29 AM Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 at 01:29 AM Article III. A. Nominating Committee(ad hoc) 1. This committee should consist of five (5) members. 2. The chairperson shall be appointed by the President3. The remaining four (4) members shall be elected by the body at the second membership meeting in July.We are a non-profit group in MA. We have elected a nominating committee in August 1, 2010. The committee would be required to meet in August of the following year, 2011. Since the By-laws are silent on the year and we did this now, we are being challenged by a member that it is violates the constitution. We also took a vote of the membership to determine if they wished the election to stand and they voted in the affirmative. Please advise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert B Fish Posted August 5, 2010 at 01:41 AM Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 at 01:41 AM Article III. A. Nominating Committee(ad hoc) 1. This committee should consist of five (5) members. 2. The chairperson shall be appointed by the President3. The remaining four (4) members shall be elected by the body at the second membership meeting in July.We are a non-profit group in MA. We have elected a nominating committee in August 1, 2010. The committee would be required to meet in August of the following year, 2011. Since the By-laws are silent on the year and we did this now, we are being challenged by a member that it is violates the constitution. We also took a vote of the membership to determine if they wished the election to stand and they voted in the affirmative. Please advise.IMO, an error in the creation of the nominating committee would not invalidate a subsequent election since the assembly has the right to nominate candidates from the floor. However, if a timely point of order were made, it might be correct to disqualify the nominating committee prior to it's reporting but it is too late at this point to do more than (fruitlessly) complain.-Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted August 5, 2010 at 01:42 AM Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 at 01:42 AM Please advise.It is unlikely that any irregularity relating to the nominating committee would constitute a continuing breach of the electoral process. In other words, the election is most likely a done deal.But next time, follow the bylaws. If it says to select the nominating committee in July, don't wait until August. And do you really want to select it a full year in advance of the elections? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdrbaker Posted August 5, 2010 at 04:37 AM Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 at 04:37 AM Article III. A. Nominating Committee(ad hoc) 1. This committee should consist of five (5) members. 2. The chairperson shall be appointed by the President3. The remaining four (4) members shall be elected by the body at the second membership meeting in July.We are a non-profit group in MA. We have elected a nominating committee in August 1, 2010. The committee would be required to meet in August of the following year, 2011. Since the By-laws are silent on the year and we did this now, we are being challenged by a member that it is violates the constitution. We also took a vote of the membership to determine if they wished the election to stand and they voted in the affirmative. Please advise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdrbaker Posted August 5, 2010 at 04:50 AM Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 at 04:50 AM IMO, an error in the creation of the nominating committee would not invalidate a subsequent election since the assembly has the right to nominate candidates from the floor. However, if a timely point of order were made, it might be correct to disqualify the nominating committee prior to it's reporting but it is too late at this point to do more than (fruitlessly) complain.-Bob[/quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted August 5, 2010 at 05:51 AM Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 at 05:51 AM If you're pointing out Bob's lamentable misuse of an apostrophe, I sorrowfully agree, but it's too late at this point do do more than (fruitlessly) complain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted August 5, 2010 at 05:59 AM Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 at 05:59 AM Kidding aside. Elsewhere (another thread, which I propose be discontinued and the discussion confined here), Bettye posted:"We are a non-profit group in MA. We have elected a nominating committee in July 2010 according to the By-laws,not August 1, as I posted earlier. The committee would be required to meet in August of the following year, 2011. You question should it be done a year in advance. Since the By-laws are silent on the year and we did this according to the the By-laws at the second membership meeting in July is this an illegal act according to thr By-laws. We were challenged by a member that it is violates the constitution. We also took a vote of the membership immediately after the election of the nominating committee to determine if the membership wished the election to stand and they voted in the affirmative. Please advise with this corrected information." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted August 5, 2010 at 06:06 AM Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 at 06:06 AM We who comment on the Robert's Rules Website Forum (RONR MB) generally refrain from commenting on particular sets f bylaws, and on how they might or might not be complied with, as we can't know all necessary information to give an informed opinion. So here's an uninformed opinion. Whatever would the alleged violation of the constitution be?I will follow up by opining (so that I get to use that word since, um, maybe high school, where I learned it, perhaps uselessly ... but that's what high school is for) that the vote to leave the election standing is probably haywire, but I can't put my finger on why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted August 5, 2010 at 11:29 AM Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 at 11:29 AM If you're pointing out Bob's lamentable misuse of an apostrophe...Kidding aside. Elsewhere ....We who comment on the Robert's Rules Website Forum....Gary - you working on getting your post count up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted August 6, 2010 at 01:17 AM Report Share Posted August 6, 2010 at 01:17 AM Gary - you working on getting your post count up?No work involved. Just let the mental cogs do their thing. That's why it's called "cogitating." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.