Dear Parliamentarian Vol. 114 Sept. 2005
Dear Parliamentarian Vol. 114 Sept. 2005
Answers to your Parliamentary Questions
"Dear Parlimentarian" is written by the author of Parliamentary Procedures Made Simple: The Basics, an 80 minute video that tells how to have better meetings.
Can a president of an association nominate himself for office again?
Has this already happened or is it about to happen? If it hasn't yet happed, what is the nominating procedure in your bylaws?
It has happened on the club level and now it up to the association to determine if they want him in office again. The club that he is a member of unanimously voted for another candidate for president for our delegate to take his name to the association meeting. There are four other clubs and I guess one of them will have to bring his name up for re-election.
Our by laws are very vague on election of officers and board members.
Someone today did tell me that they thought that he could bring his own name up.
It is a parliamentary rule that a person can nominate himself. If he is not conducting the meeting, and the rules allow him to be nominated, he can certainly do this.
If a motion is on the floor, can an officer second the motion?
Advisor to Extension Homemakers’ Clubs
Anyone can second a motion. A second means only that another person wants it discussed. However, it would be inappropriate for the presiding officer to second a motion because he is to remain impartial. If a motion in made in a board of under twelve members, motions do not need a second.
Good afternoon. I’m hoping you can help me. On 9/22/97 the City of Iron River ordered 3 video tapes on Parliamentary Procedure Made Simple (your invoice #7555). We have a situation that came up and I need some help. I don’t want to sit down and listen to 3 tapes to find my answer, I’m hoping you can help me.
At our city meeting our former councilman died and we advertised for interested persons to fill the vacancy. At the meeting 3 letters had been received. After the Mayor named the 3 names of persons who qualify, one of the councilmen made a motion to appoint one of the qualified names to fill the position. The motion was supported. One of the other councilmen thought the floor would be open for nominations but it wasn’t. Roll Call was taken and by a majority vote 3-1, the motion passed. Was this wrong? I don’t believe it was but I want to double check to make sure. Our Charter specifies what you should take place to fill a vacancy and our Mayor followed the steps. Thanks for your consideration.
Thank you for buying over videos. What does your charter specifically say about filling the vacancies?
Peggy Shamion wrote:
Thanks for replying. Our Charter states: a vacancy in the City Council shall be filled for the remainder of the unexpired term, if any, at the next regular election following not less than sixty (60) calendar days upon the occurrence of the vacancy, but the council by a majority vote of its remaining members shall appoint a qualified person to fill the vacancy until the person elected to serve the remainder of the unexpired term takes office. If the council fails to do so within 30 calendar days following the occurrence of the vacancy, the election authorities shall call a special election to fill the vacancy,, to be held not sooner than 90 calendar days and not later than 120 calendar days following the occurrence of the vacancy.
I think the one councilman wanted to appoint someone else to the board, but the first councilmen beat him to the punch and appointed someone else and when the roll call was taken the majority vote ruled. Therefore the one councilman couldn’t appoint who he wanted and he’s upset about it. I think he’s confusing it with when we appoint a Mayor, I open the floor for nominations and all the board members can nominate who they choose. Then I close the floor and we take roll call on each person who was nominated. That didn’t happen here. But I don’t think anything was done improperly. But the one councilmember does, (because he didn’t get his way)!
After reviewing the first e-mail, I see that the procedure was to make a motion to accept one of the applicants instead of nominating. In that case the councilman should has spoken against the motion (if the chair allowed that) and stated that he thought his candidate was better. So that there is no confusion in the future, may I suggest that the council adopt some parliamentary procedures on how they are going to fill a vacancy--either by motion or a nominating process. Then when this happens, the Mayor can read the rules concerning this process so everyone knows what to do. The other thing the council man could have done was to amend the motion by striking out the name and inserting the name that he wished to be elected. I know in politics there is a lot of pushing. But this can be solved by ensuring that the process is fair and everyone knows the rules.
I have a question? Please.
Our bylaws state that and amendment to the bylaws shall be presented at one meeting and voting on at the next. Can discussion take place at the meeting when the change is first presented?
A copy of the proposed amendment is given to each member at one meeting and the actual vote for approving the amendment is at the next meeting which is one month later. We meet once monthly. All this is according to our by laws.
When you say "Presented" at the first meeting what does that usually mean? Is it like giving previous notice that it will be taken up at the next meeting?
In essence what you are doing is giving previous notice at the meeting instead of by mail. Previous notice is not debatable. The way to solve the problem concerning discussion is to state that the board (or whoever is proposing it) is giving previous notice on the adoption of a proposed bylaw amendment. Then state that at the next meeting members will have the opportunity to discuss the proposed amendment, to present further amendments, if within the scope of the notice, and vote.
florence weber wrote:
Hi...I sent for some of your brochures "Parliamentary Procedure Made Simple"
Page 2 - How to Make a Motion.#5 Motions must be seconded
Page 7 - Conducting Board Meetings. #4 Motions do not need a second.
Am I missing something here? I'm confused
Thanks for your help
When making a motion at an assembly meeting, meeting of the members or in a board of more than 12 members, a main motion needs to be seconded. In small boards, those under 12 people, motions do not need to be seconded because these meetings are less formal. This is a rule and I have no idea how Henry Robert came up with this rule. Let me see if I can find some reasoning behind this and I will get back with you.