holdover officer or chairman appointment

[Guest Larry]

Our organization provides for regional chairman who are elected every two years. Our bylaws provide that these regional chairman be elected in October of every even year with notification of their election to the secretary with 30 days. If not election/notification occurs then the Chairman of the organization may make the appointment from amongst the members of the region. So my question is if the election/notification regarding the regionial chairman took place after the 30 day time frame but no appointment has been made by the Chairman are the old officers considered holdovers under Robers Rules until their successors were chosen? And if there is a subsequent election of a regional chairman and notification to the secretary would this prevent the Chairman from making an appointment from the regional membership? Hopefully someone will be able to cite something out of the Rules.

Thanks,

LW

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Our organization provides for regional chairman who are elected every two years.

Our bylaws provide that these regional chairman be elected in October of every even year with notification of their election to the secretary with 30 days.

If not election/notification occurs then the Chairman of the organization may make the appointment from amongst the members of the region.

If the election/notification regarding the regionial chairman took place after the 30 day time frame,

but no appointment has been made by the Chairman,

are the old officers considered holdovers under Robers Rules until their successors were chosen?

If there is a subsequent election of a regional chairman,

and notification to the secretary,

would this prevent the Chairman from making an appointment from the regional membership?

Larry, I think you are not asking a question about Robert's Rules of Order.

I think you are asking a question about COMPLIANCE with your own unique rule(s).

As such, there could be multiple interpretations.

As such, there won't be a single, fixed interpretation based on Robert's Rules of Order, when you are dealing with customized wording (i.e., text which was not lifted from Robert's Rules of Order).

Armed only with a dictionary, a book of English grammar, and a college textbook on logic, I could give you an opinion.

But it wouldn't be an opinion from a parliamentary viewpoint, but from a native-speaker viewpoint.

Is that what you want?

[Tim Wynn]

Our organization provides for regional chairman who are elected every two years. Our bylaws provide that these regional chairman be elected in October of every even year with notification of their election to the secretary with 30 days. If not election/notification occurs then the Chairman of the organization may make the appointment from amongst the members of the region. So my question is if the election/notification regarding the regionial chairman took place after the 30 day time frame but no appointment has been made by the Chairman are the old officers considered holdovers under Robers Rules until their successors were chosen?

It's common for organizations to include language in their bylaws that provide that officers shall serve until their successors are elected. This is recommended by Robert's Rules. See RONR(10th ed.), p. 556, l. 35 - p. 557, l. 7. Check your bylaws for this language.

And if there is a subsequent election of a regional chairman and notification to the secretary would this prevent the Chairman from making an appointment from the regional membership? Hopefully someone will be able to cite something out of the Rules.

This is a specialized rule of your organization, so RONR will be of little help in this regard, since your bylaws supersede RONR.

[Guest larry]

It's common for organizations to include language in their bylaws that provide that officers shall serve until their successors are elected. This is recommended by Robert's Rules. See RONR(10th ed.), p. 556, l. 35 - p. 557, l. 7. Check your bylaws for this language.

This is a specialized rule of your organization, so RONR will be of little help in this regard, since your bylaws supersede RONR.

We do have Article IV - Officers, which provides for the officers e.g. Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary, Treasurer, and Parliamentarian. It also includes language that these officers shall continue in office until their successor is elected.

However Article XI - Exedcutive Committee, provides for the election of the regional chairs, there is no language concerning their continuation in office until a successor is elected. The language indicates that their election must occur within 30 days after the reorganization of the group and that that the results of that election must be transmitted to the secretary within that 30 day time frame. If no election/notification then the Chairman of the organization may make an appointment from amonst the members of that region. But if the Chairman of the organization makes no appointment and there is a subsequent election of the regional chair with a notification to the secretary what would be the likely outcome? The organization could accept the continuation in office?, or the organization Chairman could try to appoint someone of their own chosing?

Thanks, LW

[Kim Goldsworthy]

We do have Article IV - Officers, which provides for the officers e.g. Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary, Treasurer, and Parliamentarian.

It also includes language that these officers shall continue in office until their successor is elected.

However Article XI - Executive Committee, provides for the election of the regional chairs, there is no language concerning their continuation in office until a successor is elected.

Ah! But that is the key.

Where there is NO FIXED TERM OF OFFICE, the appointment/election is forever. -- That is, until the party who did the appointing/electing chooses someone else.

The language indicates that their election must occur within 30 days after the reorganization of the group and that that the results of that election must be transmitted to the secretary within that 30 day time frame.

If no election/notification then the Chairman of the organization may make an appointment from amongst the members of that region.

But if the Chairman of the organization makes no appointment and there is a subsequent election of the regional chair with a notification to the secretary what would be the likely outcome?

The organization could accept the continuation in office?, or the organization Chairman could try to appoint someone of their own choosing?

Since there is no fixed term of office, then everybody continues as "regional chair."

When/If an election is held, then there may be a changeover. -- But not until then.

Put another way, the only way to lose an office is

(a.) for the sitting party to die or to resign;

(b.) for the electing body or appointing party to choose a successor.

A calendar (i.e., TIME PASSING) is not sufficient.

Someone else losing office or gaining office is not sufficient.

[Bruce Lages]

Kim -

I respectfully disagree. Larry stated that the bylaw article dealing with the election of the regional chairs does not have the specific language concerning their continuation in office until their successors are elected. I don't see how the absence of this provision, by itself, necessarliy indicates that there is no fixed term of office for the regional chairs.

[Josh Martin]

But if the Chairman of the organization makes no appointment and there is a subsequent election of the regional chair with a notification to the secretary what would be the likely outcome? The organization could accept the continuation in office?, or the organization Chairman could try to appoint someone of their own chosing?

If the Bylaws do not provide that the regional chairs continue to serve until their successors are elected, then they don't continue in office. The rest of your questions rely on the proper interpretation of your Bylaws, which is beyond the scope of this forum and is up to your organization. See RONR, 10th ed., pgs. 570-573 for some Principles of Interpretation.

Ah! But that is the key.

Where there is NO FIXED TERM OF OFFICE, the appointment/election is forever. -- That is, until the party who did the appointing/electing chooses someone else.

I don't know where you're getting this idea. Did you stop reading after "continuation in office?" It seems to me the poster is simply suggesting that the Bylaws do not include the "until their successors are elected" language.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

If the Bylaws do not provide that the regional chairs continue to serve until their successors are elected, then they don't continue in office.

You have it backwards.

All elected positions default to lasting until a successor is chosen.

E.g., a committee membership is permanent, by default, under Robert's Rules of Order, and does not expire. Only the appointing party can un-do a sitting committee member. -- That is, until a successor is chosen. Or, until the appointing party rescinds the appointment without choosing a successor.

For any position, there is no fixed term of office unless a rule other than Robert's Rules of Order provides for one, since Robert's Rules of Order has no automatic exhaustion of any term of office for anything.

(Nothing in RONR implies, "... one year ..." or "... until December 31st ..." or "... from the close of one convention to the close of the next convention ...". No term of anything is fixed. It is always, from election to election; from appointment to appointment.)

You are implying that where the bylaws are silent (where there is no successor clause, and there is no fixed term), then, (per your "don't continue" statement) you are saying that the sitting officers or sitting committee chairmen lose their position automatically.

Such is not the case.

It seems to me the poster is simply suggesting that the Bylaws do not include the "until their successors are elected" language.

It also seems that the original poster made it clear that there is no fixed term of office, either.

Where there is no fixed term, and where there is no successor clause, the default case is a permanent seat, until the authorized party un-seats the person.

[hmtcastle]

It also seems that the original poster made it clear that there is no fixed term of office, either.

Where there is no fixed term, and where there is no successor clause, the default case is a permanent seat, until the authorized party un-seats the person.

Kim -

I respectfully disagree. Larry stated that the bylaw article dealing with the election of the regional chairs does not have the specific language concerning their continuation in office until their successors are elected. I don't see how the absence of this provision, by itself, necessarliy indicates that there is no fixed term of office for the regional chairs.

[Trina]

....

You are implying that where the bylaws are silent (where there is no successor clause, and there is no fixed term), then, (per your "don't continue" statement) you are saying that the sitting officers or sitting committee chairmen lose their position automatically.

Such is not the case.

It also seems that the original poster made it clear that there is no fixed term of office, either.

Where there is no fixed term, and where there is no successor clause, the default case is a permanent seat, until the authorized party un-seats the person.

Our organization provides for regional chairman who are elected every two years. Our bylaws provide that these regional chairman be elected in October of every even year....

OK, what am I missing? Isn't Larry talking about a two-year term of office? Or are you (meaning Mr. Goldsworthy) suggesting that the bylaws must explicitly say, 'the regional chairman has a two-year term of office,' and that saying (for example), 'regional chairmen will be elected every two years, with elections to be held in October of every even year,' does not adequately imply a two-year term for this position?

[Kim Goldsworthy]

OK, what am I missing?

Isn't Larry talking about a two-year term of office?

Nope.

A rule which says, "Elections are annual" is NOT A FIXED TERM OF OFFICE.

It is a fixed term for ELECTIONS.

There is a difference.

(a.) in a fixed term of office, it makes no difference when the election is held, which is is variable, because the fixed term of office will oust the sitting officer automatically, even if no election is held.

(b.) in a non-fixed term of office (i.e., silence on the LENGTH of the term of office), the sitting officer never leaves office. A successor MUST be chosen. Or, the proper party must remove the sitting person by rescinding the appointment, or by disciplinary process, or by resignation being accepted. Nothing is fixed.

Or are you (meaning Mr. Goldsworthy) suggesting that the bylaws must explicitly say, 'the regional chairman has a two-year term of office,' and that saying (for example), 'regional chairmen will be elected every two years, with elections to be held in October of every even year,' does not adequately imply a two-year term for this position?

Nope.

You are missing the DIFFERENCE between:

(a.) a fixed time (!) for elections

(b.) a fixed term of office.

They are not the same.

A TERM of office does not necessarily follow the TIME of an election.

That isn't being "fixed". -- It is a "successor" mechanism. Elections choose successors.

• One imposes an election time on the assembly. All officers sit forever, until then.

• One imposes an end-time on the sitting officer, independent of the election.

• In one case, the sitting officer sits until the appointing party does SOMETHING -- i.e. an election.

• In the other case, the sitting officer sits until the tick of the clock, or until the calendar reached D-Day. The appointing party does NOTHING. The fixed term of office will oust the officer automatically. Thus the need for an election WELL BEFORE THE END of the fixed term of office's end. Else, you have have a GAP -- the sitting officer will be out of office BEFORE you get around to the election.

Bottom line:

The election is TO CHOOSE A SUCCESSOR.

An election is NOT a fixed term of office.

Under Robert's Rules of Order, by default, every election/appointment is a successor scenario.

You sit until the party who did the appointing does another appointing.

You sit until the assembly who did the electing holds another election.

You sit until your successor is picked and the election is final.

There is no fixed start. There is no fixed end.

There IS a "start" but it isn't fixed.

There IS an "end" but it isn't fixed.

The keyword is "fixed".

The default opposite is "unfixed" or "variable". -- A variable term of office.

In a variable (unfixed) term of office, you sit until your successor is chosen.

Your successor is chosen via an election. -- Which could be held on any date.

[Josh Martin]

You have it backwards.

All elected positions default to lasting until a successor is chosen.

E.g., a committee membership is permanent, by default, under Robert's Rules of Order, and does not expire. Only the appointing party can un-do a sitting committee member. -- That is, until a successor is chosen. Or, until the appointing party rescinds the appointment without choosing a successor.

For any position, there is no fixed term of office unless a rule other than Robert's Rules of Order provides for one, since Robert's Rules of Order has no automatic exhaustion of any term of office for anything.

(Nothing in RONR implies, "... one year ..." or "... until December 31st ..." or "... from the close of one convention to the close of the next convention ...". No term of anything is fixed. It is always, from election to election; from appointment to appointment.)

As I understand the facts provided, the Bylaws do provide for a fixed term (of two years) but do not include the "until their successors are elected" qualifier, in which case the position will be vacant when the term expires if no successor has been elected. It is your interpretation of the facts which I question here, not your interpretation of parliamentary law. You suggest that the poster has made it clear that there is no fixed term of office, but that conclusion does not seem supported by the poster's statements.