Holding Elections

[Guest Chair]

Our elections occur in the month of January at our regularly scheduled monthyly meeting. Should I hold the election of new officers at the end of the Agenda or at the beginning. If at the beginning, the new officers will not know what was discussed at the Executive Board Meeting prior to the general meeting and will be thrown into the meeting without preparation. I would like to hold the elections at the end of the Agenda.

[hmtcastle]

Should I hold the election of new officers at the end of the Agenda or at the beginning.

RONR suggests holding elections early enough so there's time for additional rounds of voting if necessary.

In any case, it's not up to you.

[Gary Novosielski]

Our elections occur in the month of January at our regularly scheduled monthyly meeting. Should I hold the election of new officers at the end of the Agenda or at the beginning. If at the beginning, the new officers will not know what was discussed at the Executive Board Meeting prior to the general meeting and will be thrown into the meeting without preparation. I would like to hold the elections at the end of the Agenda.

It is well to schedule elections early rather than late because they have a nasty way of taking much longer than you think, if you have contested seats and might need more than one ballot for some offices. If your elections are expected to go quickly, it doesn't really matter, unless they don't go as expected, which they also have a nasty habit of doing.

You can have your cake and eat it too if you adopt a rule that provides that the officers-elect take office upon adjournment of the election meeting, or upon completion of an installation ceremony which can be scheduled for the end of the meeting. [by "you" I mean, of course, your assembly, not you personally, since you can't adopt rules on your own.]

Without such a rule, officers-elect take office instantly as soon as the election becomes final.

[RONR p. 430, l. 16]

[David A Foulkes]

Our elections occur in the month of January at our regularly scheduled monthyly meeting. Should I hold the election of new officers at the end of the Agenda or at the beginning. If at the beginning, the new officers will not know what was discussed at the Executive Board Meeting prior to the general meeting and will be thrown into the meeting without preparation. I would like to hold the elections at the end of the Agenda.

It's probably me, it usually is, but....... as I read this you are having your Executive Board meeting prior to the general meeting, at which you will be holding elections for new officers. Since the EB has already met by the time the regular meeting is called to order, won't the new officers be in the dark about the EB meeting anyway, since they won't get elected until after the EB meeting is adjourned and the regular meeting is called to order?

It's me, isn't it?

[Tim Wynn]

It's probably me, it usually is, but....... as I read this you are having your Executive Board meeting prior to the general meeting, at which you will be holding elections for new officers. Since the EB has already met by the time the regular meeting is called to order, won't the new officers be in the dark about the EB meeting anyway, since they won't get elected until after the EB meeting is adjourned and the regular meeting is called to order?

It's me, isn't it?

What guest_chair seems to be missing is that the report of the board should be received before there's an election, anyway. So, the report of the board really doesn't come into play, when considering the placement of the elections. I imagine he's worried that new officers will be elected and then be expected to make a report to the assembly on behalf of the board.

[Gary Novosielski]

It's me, isn't it?

It's not you, it's me.

[Gary c Tesser]

It's not you, it's me.

Are me, Foulkes, and Novosielski dating each other? What, is this a Seinfeld episode?

[David A Foulkes]

Are me, Foulkes, and Novosielski dating each other? What, is this a Seinfeld episode?

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[hmtcastle]

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Other than the grammar.

[Gary Novosielski]

Other than the grammar.

Quite right. I should more properly have said, "It is I; it ain't youse."

[hmtcastle]

Quite right. I should more properly have said, "It is I; it ain't youse."

Actually, it was Mr. Tesser's grammar ("Are me, Foulkes, and Novosielski dating each other?") that prompted a raised eyebrow.

[David A Foulkes]

Old joke, as I barely recall it:

A knock on the Pearly Gates.

St. Peter: "Who is it?"

Visitor: "It is I."

St. Peter: "Go to hell. We've got enough grammarians here all ready."