Constitution/By Law Proposal

[Guest RJH]

A proposal will be presented will be considered at a general meeting.

Below is the propsoal at this time: (I removed the name of the group)

Nominations for officers/board of directors for the Association shall be made to the current president and board at least one week prior to the general membership meeting. There should be at least two members nominated for each position. The current president will compile a list of the nominated members, create a ballot, and present them for voting at the general membership meeting. Members may speak on behalf of those nominated as a reference to their qualification for the position prior to the balloted vote. There shall be no Acclamations. If a current officer is nominated to continue in their position or in a different position they may not participate in the ballot collection/counting process.

I have two questions:

1) Can nominations from the floor still be accepted?

2) What happens if no nominations are submitted by members by the deadline if nominations from the floor can not be accepted?

Any wording issues that conflict RONR (or not general acceptable procedures under RONR)? Any suggestions to correct wording if a part of the proposal conflicts with RONR?

Thanks!

[Robert B Fish]

A statement in your bylaws, regardless of how poorly worded or poorly crafted is always of higher authority than RONR.

As RONR points out, requirements to nominate two persons for each position can easily be "fixed" by nominating an unelectable person to the second slot.

Although only your organization can determine what best for it, you might be better off to not require two nominees per position and allow nominations from the floor, especially if there is no nominee made previously.

"Hope for the best; write for the worst."

-Bob

[Josh Martin]

1) Can nominations from the floor still be accepted?

The general membership could reopen nominations by majority vote to permit nominations from the floor.

2) What happens if no nominations are submitted by members by the deadline if nominations from the floor can not be accepted?

I don't believe the proposal prohibits nominations from being reopened, but even if nominations from the floor were prohibited you could just use write-in votes.

Any wording issues that conflict RONR (or not general acceptable procedures under RONR)? Any suggestions to correct wording if a part of the proposal conflicts with RONR?

Assuming this is a proposal to amend the Bylaws, it doesn't really matter if it conflicts with RONR as your Bylaws supersede RONR. The main conflict I see with RONR is the two nominations rule. RONR advises against this. While I'm sure there are noble intentions behind the rule, it's so easy to "cheat" the requirement that it doesn't really serve its purpose.