Dear Parliamentarian Vol. 130 Jan. 2007
Dear Parliamentarian Vol. 130 Jan. 2007
Answers to your Parliamentary Questions
drvideo@comcast.net
"Dear Parliamentarian" is written by the author of Parliamentary Procedures Made Simple: The Basics, an 80 minute video that tells how to have better meetings.
Jorge Figueroa wrote:
Dear Robert,
I have a brother that lives in Detroit who, since he told his immediate neighbor
-who is retired and the Vice-President of his homeowner's association-
to keep his dog within his yard (because the dog was defecating in his yard),
has been receiving a flood of Home owner association complaints, some which
appear to be arbitrary & capricious (i.e., no lawn growing during winter) and
discriminatory (he was given 15 days to move his son's swings system, which he
moved, and his neighbor, the vice president of the homeowners’ association, 250
days to move his jacuzzi, which he has not moved).
Moreover, his neighbor told my brother, who takes good care of his house, that his back yard and inside of the house is full of garbage.
The point of this letter is to see what parliamentary procedural tools my brother
might have pertaining to the apparent arbitrary & capricious & discriminatory
criteria the homeowner's association imposes on my brother, apparently because
of the personal problems the Vice-President has against him.
Thank you for taking the time to read this request.
Atentamente,
Jorge Figueroa
Dear Jorge,
The first thing your brother needs to do is to read his governing documents, covenants and bylaws. Many covenants require dog owners to keep their dogs in their yards or on a leash. And they also required dog owners to clean up after their dogs. He also might approach the city (if he lives within the city limits) about leash laws. If these can support your brother he needs to write a letter to the board members stating his case and asking for them to consider the harsh reaction from the Vice President for asking him to keep his dog in his own yard.
This is really a case of revenge. Perhaps your brother can try to find a way to make amends with the neighbor. When he does write a letter or if he goes before the board, he needs to be very respectful, courteous and keep his cool. This kind of an approach will win friends and influence people in the right way.
The Parliamentarian
Lee1fam@aol.com wrote:
Hello,
In a meeting called after worship service one Sunday, it was suggested to put a sizeable deposit down on a new piece of equipment for the church. Without a lot of discussion, I believe because it was presented so quickly, it was motioned and seconded to accept the suggestion. After some of the members discussed the money situation the body felt it would not be feasibly to comply to this at this time. I would like to know if a motion in church has been seconded and passed, how can you go about dismissing that motion?
Thank You,
Pam
Dear Pam,
One way would be for the member who made the motion to "request permission to withdraw the motion," and the second way would be for members to vote against it.
The Parliamentarian
Dear Parliamentarian,
Elections. I am the parliamentarian for a small non-profit association
and I want to give proper guidance that I can't find in my book.
Can a member of the nominating committee, the chairman, run for
office, the V.P. position?
It appears to me that this could be called a little unethical and give
a bit of an unfair advantage to this member.
Thanks
Garnet
Dear Garnet,
Robert’s Rules of Order specifically states that a member of the
nominating committee can be placed in nomination. What book do you
have? If it is a book that I have perhaps I can find the page reference
for you. If not I will send you what the official book says.
The Parliamentarian
Dear Parliamentarian.
Can he nominate himself, as chairman, or should he be nominated from the floor?
Thanks
Garnet
Dear Garnet,
This is done by the nominating committee. In committee, the members of this committee should decide who is being placed for nomination in each office. It should be first voted upon by the committee. So the Nominating Committee chairman can say I nominate myself for this office or perhaps someone else has said, "Joe, you would make a good president. Why don't we put your name up for nomination for this office?" Then the members vote on doing so. After they have completed their work, they write a report and state who they are nominating for the various offices. At the membership meeting, the chairman of the committee should read the nominees to the members.
President Joe Jones
Vice President Dick Clark
Treasurer Carol Smith
Secretary Julia Childs
Then the presiding officer states, the following have been placed in nomination by the nominating committee and reads the list of the candidates. The President then opens each office for further nominations from the members or the floor.
The Parliamentarian
Dear Robert McConnell,
I am currently in position as president of a parent committee. Our members are our parents, grandparents, and guardians. We have not set in by-laws. However; we have elected broad members, some of our members have not been performing their duties. I would like to know was it right for us to re-elect new members. Being that the old members had refused to send in letters of resignation, based on the fact that they had missed three or more meetings.
The second question is in regards to the bank account. In a small group like this who is suppose to be on the account. I as president have elected not to be on the account, because I felt since I am the one collecting monies, it was wise to have two other people overseeing the fund also and that they would be the ones responsible for depositing funds and payments on behalf of the club. Please help
Bridgette
Dear Bridgette,
You say that you are president of a "parent committee." Does that mean that you are a committee of another organization ? Or are you an independent organization calling yourself a committee? If you are the latter how long have you existed and how and when did you get started?
The Parliamentarian
gailgarn PEACOCK wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: GARNET PEACOCK
To:
Cc: gailgarn
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 1:32 PM
Subject: Roberts Rules of Order
We have a small non-profit association with over 100 members wherein there is a general meeting once a month. It has been suggested that we dispense with the reading of the previous meetings minutes as well as the treasurers report but instead post them on our bulletin board prior to the meetings.
Can this be interpreted as proper procedure?
My copy of Roberts Rules of Order says that, after calling a meeting to order the "first business in order is reading of the minutes" and the second is "the Treasurers report" then, after points about the treasurers report, there is a paragraph "dispensing with the reading of the minutes" but it also says they will have to be read at a later time. Then in the same paragraph "If members vote to dispense with the reading of the minutes, the minutes can be ordered read at any time".
I'm confused.
Thanks,
Garnet
Dear Garnet,
Dispensing with the reading of the minutes is not recommended. Occassionally it may need to be done but then should be done at some later time. The minutes must be approved as read or corrected to be considered valid minutes. Posting them on the bulletin board does not approve them. If the organization has a minutes approval committee then it could post the minutes on the bulletin board.
The reason why the minutes are read at the opening of the meeting is:
1. to approve them as correct and if not to make corrections.
2. it allows the absent members to hear what transpired at the last meeting.
3. it reminds those present at the last meeting about what happened
4. it reminds members if there is a motion that was laid on the table at the last meeting that someone must take it from the table or it dies.
5. it shows what business is carried over to this meeting, and if it has not been put on the agenda then members can point out that it must be taken up at this meeting.
Those who want to dispense with minutes and Treasurer's reports do not understand the right of the members to be informed or to ask questions. They are under the illusion that this takes too much time. IF that is the case perhaps the chairman isn't handling the discussion correctly or perhaps there is too much information in the minutes.
The Parliamentarian
Dear Parlimentarian:
> >I watched your How to Conduct a Meeting through the public library
> and
> >thought it was excellent. I'm hoping my organization will purchase
> your
> >instruction tapes soon.
> >I have another question: there is now a motion that requires the
> board to
> >submit all NBI 7 days in advance. It will be voted on by the
> >representative assembly. It was sent to the representatives 3
> days
> >before they need to vote on it. How would you rule on such a
> motion?
> >Thank you.
> >Sincerely,
> >Pat
> >
Dear Pat,
What is NBI? Was an NBI sent three days instead of seven
days?
The Parliamentarian
Thank you for letting us know that you liked the tape.
Patricia A Bailey wrote:
Dear The Parliamentarian,
Sorry for the confusion. Here is the motion that was given to the representatives on Friday 3 days before they will vote on it at the rep assembly (this Monday:)
I move that we require New Business Items be submitted a minimum of seven days prior to our scheduled board meetings and representative assemblies, and that the New Business Item then be distributed to all board members and building representatives at least four days prior to their scheduled meeting; with an emergency clause that with a majority vote the New Business Item will be considered immediately.
Besides the issue that it appears the board motions will be distributed to the reps. (probably not intended) I'm wondering how you see this motion--the legality.
Thanks,
Pat.
Dear Pat,
Thank you for clarifying this for me. This motion is what is considered a rule of order since it is limiting the presentation of new business at a meeting. This is a legal motion. To adopt a rule of order it needs previous notice and a two thirds vote. So this will have to be adopted by a two thirds vote. If adopted, it should be written in a document called "Rules of Order" with any other similar rules that you have adopted. Another point that you need to know: it can always be suspended at a meeting by a two thirds vote.
The Parliamentarian
Dear The Parliamentarian,
Nothing new has come of the attempt to remove the president.
I will keep you posted.
There seems to be a different tactic that is being used. Without getting
into complicated details I would like to ask an opinion on one subject.
The constitution says under DUTIES OF OFFICERS
It shall be the duty of the president .....to appoint all committees except
standing committees,
There is nothing in the rest of the document stating how the standing
committee should be filled.
I am assuming the word APPOINT was incorrectly used and that the intention
is to say form or establish committees.
What do you do when there is unworkable language in a Constitution and
actions need to be taken before there is time to amend the document?
Thanks in advance for you assistance.
Joel
Dear Joel,
The constitution no doubt *does mean appoint.* In many bylaws the president has the duty to appoint members to committees. But evidently these are committees that the membership creates at a meeting. Please tell me what are the standing committees? Do you have an executive board or committee? What exactly do you want to do that would be in violation with your bylaws?
The Parliamentarian
PS. Did you ever go to that NAP chapter meeting?
Joel Ringer wrote:
Joel Ringer wrote:
The Parliamentarian,
Thank you for responding. I did go to the NAP meeting. I found it very interesting but not very enlightening in regard to my situation.
I think you missed the point of my message. The constitution states that the President shall appoint all committees *EXCEPT STANDING COMMITTEES*. Nowhere does it state how members of standing committees are appointed.
The standing committees are: Civic affairs; Sports and recreation; Parks, gardens and grounds; Historian / Publicity.
The Executive Committee includes all officers and chairmen of committees both standing and special.
The terms of committee chairman is not stated.
There are no voting requirements, such as quorem, for the Executive committee.
Dear Joel,
How have the standing committees been appointed in the past? The members voting for them or some other means?
Joel Ringer wrote:
The Parliamentarian,
There was a very contentious meeting tonight. There was an attempt to hijack the executive committee which has budget approval powers.
It is fun to go into a meeting having one item well researched and in your back pocket and lo-and-behold someone challenges you on that very subject. You look like a genius.
During the committee reports section someone had a parliamentary inquiry and asked about the appointment of standing committee chairs. BINGO. I explained that the wording was ambiguous and that if you read the totality of the document there was no way of appointing members of standing committees. The word establish makes more sense than appoint. I explained that within RONR there were sections dealing with interpretations of ambiguous statements. I spoke to a person who had been on the last rewrite of the by-laws and asked him what was the intent of the statement. He confused establishing a committee with appointing a committee and recognized that establish would have been a better word. I used origin intent as an argument.
I received your questions about precedent as I was leaving for the meeting and instantly added that to my quiver of arguments – the President has always appointed all of the chairpersons.
There was stunned submission at the end my dissertation.
To add icing to the cake I had already put a back-story in place. At the beginning of the committee reports I filled in for the Chairman of the Bylaws Revision Committee and announced that we had begun studying problems with the existing bylaws. When I started expounding on the specific problems with the word *appoint* I explained that I had done extension research on this on behalf of the Revision Committee.
Someone, a lawyer no less, made a motion that in conformance with the bylaws no chairperson should be appointed to standing committees until the Revision committee solve the wording problem. After a lot of heated discussion on the wording and logic of the motion I told the chairperson to declare the motion out of order because it conflicted with the bylaws. I told the meeting that the decision of the chairperson could be appealed with a 2/3s vote. It is amazing how a meeting can turn a corner but you are not sure what happened and how you got there. The motion was declared out of order but the decision *was not appealed*. Go figure.
I told everyone that I wanted a Professional Parliamentarian to review any document before it is presented for approval. It wanted to make sure an outside non-partisan voice can objectively look at the document and warn us of the consequences of our inclusions or omissions. I wanted to contact 2 or 3 professional parliamentarians and ask them for an outline of what they can do for us. I have contacted the President of the NJ chapter of NAP. If you have any interest in getting involved with this process please let me know.
Joel Ringer
The Parliamentarian
Great work! I should have added that tradition does have a standing in an organization and can be seen as a standing rule. So if the executive committee or president has appointed chairman or members of the committee that stands until rules are adopted that determines something different.
Yes, I would be interested in reviewing your bylaws and helping out. I do a lot of work with writing and amending bylaws. You can see the articles that I have written on the web site about bylaws.
The Parliamentarian
Ninelives9@comcast.net wrote:
I am the President of a small non profit animal shelter. A long time member and board member who is our Treasurer has developed an attitude this year and has been disruptive at meetings. She has made derogatory remarks about others at the meeting...despite asking her to calm down she continues on. I am going to have a long talk with her prior to our next meeting and I want to know that I have the right to ask her to leave the board meeting if she gets out of hand again? Thank You
Lisa
Dear Lisa,
It is great that you will talk with this member first. Hopefully you can find out what is bothering the member and find ways to resolve the issue. In your discussion, let this member know that if she continues this disruptive behavior at meetings you will correct her at the meetings. If during the meeting, she ignores your corrections, you will use a parliamentary term called "call the member to order" and "naming the offender" which allows you as chairman to ask the other board members how they want to handle this situation. As chair you have no power to ask her to leave the meeting. If you have a fax number, I will be glad to send you information on how to handle this situation from Robert's Rules of Order. You must carefully follow the correct procedure. If you don't you will have more troubles on your hand and perhaps a law suit.
The Parliamentarian
I will fax something today. I think if you go over things with her she will stop or resign the position. This thought came to me this morning about her behavior. Does she feel that she is being "heard" at meetings or are people ignoring the points that she is making? This may just be a miscommunication problem or it may be that she has different goals for the club than the course it is taking. When talking with her listen carefully to what she is saying. If she has been a good member, then try to keep the member and preserve harmony in the club.
The Parliamentarian
ninelives9@comcast.net wrote:
my work fax number is 717-944-4469
Thanks
Lisa
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Robert McConnell <drvideo@comcast.net>
Dear Lisa,
It is great that you will talk with this member first. Hopefully
you can find out what is bothering the member and find ways to resolve
the issue. In your discussion, let this member know that if she
continues this disruptive behavior at meetings you will correct her at
the meetings. If during the meeting, she ignores your corrections, you
will use a parliamentary term called "call the member to order" and
"naming the offender" which allows you as chairman to ask the other
board members how they want to handle this situation. As chair you have
no power to ask her to leave the meeting. If you have a fax number, I
will be glad to send you information on how to handle this situation
from /Robert's Rules of Order. /You must carefully follow the correct
procedure. If you don't you will have more troubles on your hand and
perhaps a law suit.
The Parliamentarian
ninelives9@comcast.net wrote:
my work fax number is --------
Thanks
Lisa
I will fax something today. I think if you go over things with her she will stop or resign the position. This thought came to me this morning about her behavior. Does she feel that she is being "heard" at meetings or are people ignoring the points that she is making? This may just be a miscommunication problem or it may be that she has different goals for the club than the course it is taking. When talking with her listen carefully to what she is saying. If she has been a good member, then try to keep the member and preserve harmony in the club.
The Parliamentarian
ninelives9@comcast.net wrote:
She has health problems and in her own words "I can be quite bitchy at times". I am a hospice nurse and understand how health affect our mood but that gives her no right to belittle other members of the board...it is almost as she now uses her health as an excuse to just plan be rude and sarcastic.
Lisa
Dear Lisa,
Then I would approach this with kindness but firmness. I would ask her "what does she want to be remembered for in her work with the club--the great co-operative worker or one who "was bitchy at times?" Of course we know what the answer is. Perhaps you need to take some recesses during the meeting so that she can compose her. One of the phrases that I use in conducting meetings is this: "will the member please keep his remarks to the merits of the motions." Or is someone is talking out of turn or interrupting another, I will say "member Y has the floor right now and has the only right to speak." I have also reminded members that a basic rule at meetings is to be courteous to one another. May I recommend our book "Webster's New World Robert's Rules of Order Simplified and Applied." Our book talks a great deal about courtesy and other common sense things besides just the rules. You can buy it from us or at your local bookstore. It is very easy to read and I am sure it will help you and your organization.
The Parliamentarian
Leonard Hirschfeld wrote:
Dear Parliamentarian.
Is it appropriate at an annual HOA meeting, the primary purpose of which is to elect a new board and to approve or reject the Board’s recommended budget for a dissident board member who happens to be the Secretary to
a) argue against the recommended budget at the annual meeting and/or
b) introduce a motion that sought a membership vote on a key budget component re the timing of planned road maintenance work prior to the budget being voted on.
Was his actions re (a) just bad form, but permitted OR was he as a board member, obligated to support’s the board’s position at the annual meeting.
Even if a) is permitted, what is the legal foundation for ruling the motion b) out of order.
For the record, this what I, as President did. I ruled the Secretary's motion as improper and out of order on the grounds that the budget vote was the main question and to permit
a vote of on his motion would lead to chaos and infinite loops as every budget item could be subjected to this exercise.
I clearly noted that those who did not want to complete the projects detailed in the recommended budget could simple vote to reject the budget.
I also referenced WA state law RCW 64.38.025
For the record, I guided a vigorous, civil debate about the key issue so all in attendance could evaluate the merits of the different positions.
The budget passed 20 to 12.
But was it appropriate for a Board member to oppose the recommended budget?
I appreciate any light you can shed on this matter.
Thank you.
LWH
Dear Leonard,
Thank you for writing. I hope that I can shed some light on this for you. First, I want to praise you for wanting clarification on this subject and for allowing a good debate on the issues. I commended you for this.
But for the record, it was appropriate for your board member to oppose the recommendation of the budget if that is his position. In Robert's Rules of Order, there is a provision for a minority report from a board or a committee. This applies to your situation. Members of the association certainly have a right to hear all sides of an issue and that would include a minority viewpoint of board.
When the budget is presented to the members for a vote, it becomes a main motion and is open to amendment. If the budget was under discussion, anyone, including the secretary can move to amend the budget by striking out a figure and inserting another. This is a subsidiary motion and has precedence over the main the motion. The correct procedure is for the presiding officer to place the motion to amend, if it was seconded by another member, to the assembly for discussion and a vote. If the motion to amend was adopted, then it changes that particular budget line item. The budget as amended is now open for discussion and vote.
So that means that every budget item is open for amendment and discussion. The members are paying the bills and should have the right to question line items and change them as necessary. In our HOA, it was the mishandling of the budget and new assessments that caused great chaos. What the board wanted to do and what the HOA members wanted were two different things. How we finally amended the budget was by voting against the assessment. It was a round about way to do it, but that was the only thing our president could understand.
The most important point for HOA officers and members to remember is that the board members are elected to represent the members but not to dictate to the members. These officers have a very important responsibility to see that the state laws, the covenants and bylaws are enforced impartially. But the board’s highest obligation of all is to defend the members’ rights to speak, to agree or disagree with board decisions and decide the course of the association by a vote of the members.
When we serve on HOA boards, we must remember that there will always be disagreements and dissents. And in cases where the board members can’t agree, then let the HOA members decide.
If you need help in conducting your meetings, may I recommend our videos/DVD’s on this subject and our very useful book, Webster’s New World Robert’s Rules of Order Simplified and Applied. Find them at our bookstore on the Web at “parli.com.”
The Parliamentarian
Nancy Owens wrote:
I belong to the Board of Directors of an Affiliate of a National Group. At our last Board Meeting a motion was made on a particular subject, motion was seconded, debate held, and the motion passed 8-4 in favor.
Now it has been brought to an officer's attention that a member of the Board that voted against the motion is going to make a motion to reconsider the decision of the original motion. We operate according to Roberts Rules of Order. Is this action legal or does it become a "Point of Order".
Any assistance would be appreciated. The meeting will be held tomorrow, a speedy answer is requested.
Thank you,
Nancy Owens
Dear Nancy,
The motion to reconsider can only be made by a person who voted in favor of the motion and it must be made at the meeting the motion was adopted. What the member can do is make a motion to rescind or amend something previously adopted. Any one can make this motion. It does have some rules. One is that a motion can't be rescinded or amended if the action is already carried out and can't be undone. Two, if no previous notice is given it takes two thirds vote to adopted or a majority of the entire membership of the board, whichever is easier to attain. If previous notice is given, then it is adopted by a majority vote.
A point of order is called by a member when a rule has been broken and the presiding officer does not correct the breach of the rule. If the above rule is not enforced by the presiding officer, then you can call a point of order and explain the correct procedure.
You might find our book, Webster's New World, Robert's Rules of Order Simplified and Applied helpful in understanding these procedures. The book is written in very simple language so that all can understand the rules. You can buy it from us or at a bookstore.
The Parliamentarian
GLORIA RUTTMAN wrote:
Do the homeowners have the right to vote on a proposed budget presented by a Board to the homeowners at their annual homeowners association meeting? Or, as the present thinking of the board, because the homeowners have elected them to office they have the right to create a budget and present it to the homeowners but their approval is not needed. I am looking forward to your reply. Thank you
Dear Gloria,
What state are you in? Does your state have a HOA code? Most codes address the budget. If it is the standard state code about the budget, the members vote. But it is worded in such a way that in voting the members by a 51% must reject the budget. Then the previous year's budget is still in place. If there are no codes that govern the situation, the members have a right to vote on the budget and propose amendments. Concerning monetary matters, the members have not handed everything over to the board. Look in your bylaws and covenants to see what they say about this issue.
The Parliamentarian
Patricia A Bailey wrote:
Dear Parliamentarian,
Our organization is subject to RRONR. Is the following motion legal?
I move that we require new business items be submitted a minimum of five days prior to our scheduled board meeting...
It seems to me that the ability to make motions from the floor is fundamental to the democratic process.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Pat
Dear Pat,
This motion is considered a "Rule of Order" since it sets aside the common parliamentary rule. It needs previous notice and is adopted by a two thirds vote. If it becomes adopted as a "Rule of Order," it can be suspended for a meeting by a two thirds vote if important business comes up that wasn't put on the agenda. I agree with you about it taking away fundamental rights. However, by adopting the rule about business being submitted ahead of the meeting, it may give the board members more time to do their research on the business items and be better prepared for the meeting. Remember for this motion to be adopted it needs a two thirds vote and previous notice. And, it can always be suspended by a two thirds vote to bring up something at the meeting if need be.
The Parliamentarian
J. Andrew Manning wrote:
Hi,
1.) I am on a non profit board and would like to rescind a motion. Robert
Rules states that in order for the majority vote to be the decision a notice
to the members is required. I cannot find anything that defines the number
of prior days notice required to the board. Our meeting is on Wednesday....
If a notice went out to the board on Monday or Tuesday is that Ok...
2.) In addition we have one board member who really understands Robert
Rules and is fast to make motions that then the board agrees to without any
prior due diligence. She is very bright does not want to hold an officers
position but is really controlling the board and meeting. Any suggestions?
3.) Our bylaws state that we can have up to 20 members on the board we are
down to 8 including the President..... Can the President vote?
Help!!
Dear Andrew,
Usually notice is given in the call to the meeting letter. However, if you do not send out a call letter to the meeting, get the notice out a.s.a.p.! Let me know if you have a call letter.
2. The best way to have this person stop manipulating the board is for everyone to get informed about the rules and then be aware of what this person is doing. That is the only defense I know.
3. My goodness why such a decrease on the board? Are you having internal problems? If the bylaws do not prohibit the president from voting then the he can usually vote.
The Parliamentarian
J. Andrew Manning wrote:
1.) This meeting was to be a executive committee meeting and the President
did sent out a meeting notice to discuss the motion I want to rescind
however; it did not state that I was going to rescind the motion. In
addition the meeting was changed from an executive committee meeting to a
full board meeting. Is it too late to send out the notice to rescind?
3.) The most members we have ever had is 14. However; we have had internal problems with our ED and financial issues.
Thank you very much for your help!
Dear Andrew,
Try it and see what happens. IF they don't accept the notice, you can still bring it up. It will just take a two thirds vote to adopt or a majority of the entire membership of the board whichever is easier to get. But the question that I have is: who is to make the decision on this --the executive committee or the board? You must have whatever body adopted it, rescind it.
The Parliamentarian
Doug & Judi wrote:
Is it legal/ethical for a HOA board of directors to place all of its members on the ballot as a unit of one instead of each board member placing his/her name in nomination separately?
Judith Strayer
President
Silverado Hills Master Association
Tucson, AZ
Dear Judith,
No. It is called a "slate". However, it would make it hard for individuals to run against them unless they have a "slate" of candidates. If you are having a problem with individuals trying to run for board positions against this slate, let me know.
The Parliamentarian
Doug & Judi wrote:
Thank you for your response. Currently, there are just five board members. Others quit in frustration, I believe. I joined the board in September 2006. One of the remaining four wants me to agree to run on a slate as a unit against all of the others who would be running as individuals. There is nothing in the by-laws to allow for this and I do not believe it is ethical...even if it is legal. It seems there would be an unfair advantage in favor of the current board if this were permitted. What is your advice?
Thanks,
Judi Strayer
Silverado Hills
Dear Judi,
I agree with you. First of all you can't have an election with individuals against a slate. Usually you cast one vote for the slate. In our presidential elections, we vote for the slate of President and Vice President. We cast just one vote. The most democratic thing to do is for everyone to be voted on as individuals. So if the board wants a slate, then the others running will also have to be a slate, too.
The Parliamentarian