Multiple Chairmen?

[Guest Sarah D]

Is it possible to have two chairmen? Its a three person board. Two commissioners want to be chairman and neither is willing to bow out. Counsel has suggested that they be co-chairs. Is there any rule against this in RR?

[hmtcastle]

Is there any rule against this in RR?

RONR strongly advises against co-chairs for the "impossible dilemmas" that can arise. (p. 168)

[Tim Wynn]

Is it possible to have two chairmen?

Please don't.

Its a three person board. Two commissioners want to be chairman and neither is willing to bow out.

It's not necessary for candidates to "bow out" for a chair to be named. The appointing power will simply select its choice.

Counsel has suggested that they be co-chairs.

I suspect "counsel" is unfamiliar with the duties of the chair. These duties make co-chairs impractical.

[Guest Sarah D]

The appointing power is the board itself. They vote amongst each other as to who will be chair.

[Tim Wynn]

The appointing power is the board itself. They vote amongst each other as to who will be chair.

Then, the third board member will decide. It's that simple.

[David A Foulkes]

Then, the third board member will decide. It's that simple.

Except perhaps for that unfortunate third board member!

[Tim Wynn]

Except perhaps for that unfortunate third board member!

Imagine that poor member sitting on a board with two chairs presiding over him. He'd be the only one who's not the presiding officer. Why not three chairs? Also, any invited guests are honorary chairs. This is starting to sound more like a day care.

[Guest Sarah D]

The third board member plans to abstain. Hence the dilemma.

[Tim Wynn]

The third board member plans to abstain. Hence the dilemma.

Voting will have to continue until a chairman is elected. The third board member can end all this, even if by flipping a coin.

Really, though, if this group can't handle the election of a chair (the first step), what hope does it have for accomplishing any further business?

[Chris Harrison]

The third board member plans to abstain. Hence the dilemma.

I saw that response coming from a mile away! I guess it is up to those two to work it out among themselves (or the third member can grow a spine). Maybe they can agree to a game of chance such as rock-paper-scissors, drawing lets, flipping a coin, etc with the winner getting the office.

[David A Foulkes]

The appointing power is the board itself. They vote amongst each other as to who will be chair.

And it might be a good idea to consider amending the rules (bylaws or other) if possible in away that takes this dilemma out of the picture in the future.

[Tim Wynn]

I saw that response coming from a mile away! I guess it is up to those two to work it out among themselves (or the third member can grow a spine). Maybe they can agree to a game of chance such as rock-paper-scissors, drawing lets, flipping a coin, etc with the winner getting the office.

"Ms. Evans has eighteen... Mr. Anderson has twenty-one and is now the chairman." Let's hope they don't have to elect a secretary.

[tctheatc]

Imagine that poor member sitting on a board with two chairs presiding over him. He'd be the only one who's not the presiding officer. Why not three chairs? Also, any invited guests are honorary chairs. This is starting to sound more like a day care.

Or a particular church I used to belong to!!

[Guest Ernie Hartong]

Question, the past president is a non-voting member of the Board, can this person still make or second motions?

Ernie H

[hmtcastle]

Question, the past president is a non-voting member of the Board, can this person still make or second motions?

RONR has no class of "non-voting" members so you'll have to figure out what your non-voting members can and can't do.

But most here would say that if only the right to vote is removed, all other rights remain.

(For future reference, you might also want to post a new topic as, well, a new topic.)

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Is it possible to have two chairmen? Its a three person board. Two commissioners want to be chairman and neither is willing to bow out. Counsel has suggested that they be co-chairs. Is there any rule against this in RR?

There is nothing wrong with hiring a parliamentarian to act as the presiding officer.

If you have a conflict in choosing who to pick as the chairman, the finesse that problem by "jumping outside the system" and get an impartial third party.

[Gary Novosielski]

Is it possible to have two chairmen? Its a three person board. Two commissioners want to be chairman and neither is willing to bow out. Counsel has suggested that they be co-chairs. Is there any rule against this in RR?

It is not possible, without your bylaws explicitly authorizing it.

It is not advisable, ever.

(And counsel needs a copy of RONR.)

Who or what, by your rules, appoints the chairman of this board? Is it the members of the board who elect the chair? If so, it sounds like Member #3 holds the deciding vote. If someone else appoints the chairman, tell that person to appoint one.

One.

[Josh Martin]

Is it possible to have two chairmen? Its a three person board. Two commissioners want to be chairman and neither is willing to bow out. Counsel has suggested that they be co-chairs. Is there any rule against this in RR?

Co-Chairs are only permissible for a board if provided for in your Bylaws. Additionally, it's simply impossible as a practical matter to have two people chair a meeting simultaneously. It would be preferable to have one member be the chair and one be the "Vice Chair." Even in assemblies which have "Co-Chairs," the title is mainly ceremonial, and either by rule or custom one of the "co-chairs" is the Chair and one is the Vice Chair for parliamentary purposes.