22.12.2012 Views

NEAFC 70th Annual Conference.pdf - New England Association of ...

NEAFC 70th Annual Conference.pdf - New England Association of ...

NEAFC 70th Annual Conference.pdf - New England Association of ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

you deem it necessary, Mr. President, why not go through your<br />

Parliamentarian? But I think, for moving it along in a more<br />

simplified manner, have a vote and do it for Secretary-Treasurer.<br />

PRESIDENT MANSFIELD: I am going to turn this over to<br />

the parliamentarian because it will be his decision.<br />

RETIRED CHIEF MERTON S. DYER: [Peterborough, NH]<br />

The <strong>of</strong>ficers <strong>of</strong>the organization shall consist <strong>of</strong> a Secretary and<br />

a Treasurer. They are two separate <strong>of</strong>fices. It appears the best<br />

procedure to follow is supposed to be followed for the election <strong>of</strong><br />

the Secretary by a ballot vote. There is nothing to preclude the<br />

election <strong>of</strong> the Treasurer by a voice vote. I think each election<br />

should go forward separately. Somebody may want to make a<br />

nomination for the other <strong>of</strong>fice. I think they should be done<br />

separately and I think that’s the way to deal with the problem.<br />

CHIEF JAMES M. HALLISE¥: [Brocktol~, MA] I rise to a<br />

point <strong>of</strong> order. I would make it clear whether it’s Robert’s Rules<br />

<strong>of</strong> Order, Cushing’s Rules <strong>of</strong> Order, Jefferson’s, you name it, no<br />

matter who you have. Our executive board has, in its wisdom,<br />

put <strong>of</strong>f till next year perhaps or some other time the changing<br />

from Secretary and Treasurer, which is in our by-laws not to<br />

separate them.<br />

So in the interest <strong>of</strong> moving this meeting along, I see nothing<br />

wrong in taking another nomination. You may have two votes<br />

if you’d like on Secretary or Treasurer, but we had a screening<br />

committee to go through the candidates. And the candida~tes<br />

were, in my understanding, the Secretary/Treasurer. Why is it<br />

that we’re going now, comma and semicolon and period in the<br />

constitution and by-laws to have two separate votes? And now<br />

Mr. Parliamentarian and you come across and say we may now<br />

have a voice vote if there are mo~e than two people. We haven’t<br />

had a vote <strong>of</strong> more than two people anyway. But to divide this<br />

when there is a contest between two capable individuals, why<br />

not have a nomination now? I don’t understand your objection,<br />

Mr. Parliamentarian, through Mr. Chairman.<br />

RETIRED CHIEF DYER: We are operating with Robert’s<br />

Rules <strong>of</strong> Order. The motion under the constitution, I don’t<br />

believe it was to separate or to join the <strong>of</strong>fice <strong>of</strong> Secretary and<br />

Treasurer, but to remove some <strong>of</strong> the restrictions on where they<br />

would live.<br />

As far as a voice vote, we have had more or less a ballot. The<br />

constitution calls for a ballot vote. You vote for Treasurer and if<br />

73

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!