Agree and Disagree

You are right the membership has been quite clear. And you are also right that Steve Lange does not even fully understand the issue.

The bottom line is, SL was never removed from his President Elect Position. When the membership voted to remove Steve Lange from being President, they did not vote to remove him from his President Elect position.
Read the motion. Call Jim Martin he will tell you.

This is a house cleaning issue. However, removal of an officer IS a formal issue. I am just requesting that all of the i's be dotted and all of the t's be crossed.

Is there anything wrong with that?

Elections

I have been curious about the election of a President-Elect when it appeares that Steve is still in that position. After our last neighborhood meeting, I looked through the posting and found one that looked to be rather official: On June 24th James O?’Donnell reported that ?“The said motion directed the Board to ask for the resignation of Steve Lange as President. . .?” Note, the motion was to ask for his resignation as President, not President-Elect

In addition, the NSNA web page cites, in two places (?“About our association?” and ?“Bios of Board members?”), that Greg is President and Steve is President Elect. Those would have necessarily been written after the Board removed Steve from Presidency.

It would appear that if the neighborhood moves forward with an election for a President Elect, without removing Steve from the position, we will then have two Presidents Elect. Rather messy.

I have also found a few websites where you can post questions about Robert?’s Rules. They were not much help here (but, if you run a search for Robert?’s Rules, you will find some interesting sites).

I am surprised that the only qualification to be a candidate for President elect is that the person be a member of the association for one year. It would appear that in the past the President elect was member of the board for at least one year. That would assure that he or she was prepared for the position by being familiar with the functions and operations of the board and committees, and current issues confronting the board. If membership on the board is no longer an important qualification, then in the future it seem to be that the President elect would not need to be a member of the board. I would rather see the qualification for at least a year service on the board.

To B. Frey

Mr. Lange was removed from the office of President. After the resignation of J. Frey , he automatically assumed that office. Thus he was no longer President - elect. The board voted in Burton to fill the President-elect position.

The bio posting was submitted by and submitted by Lange shortly after the CVS conroversy broke out and has no official bearing on the matter.

The by-laws definitely need to be completely re-written by some one with professional experience in that area. The last time they were revised it was done ''in house'' with an agenda to block a certain (no longer active) member from disrupting meetings.

Re: qaulifications

Here's an idea I heard about a week ago concerning knowledge/continuity on the board- especialy for presidents position. Why not have two year terms for all board members, then have the president chosen from those ranks.
The terms would alternate so that each year about half the board would be up for election. This made sense to me and I figure there'sa reason the US congress is elected ths way, instead of all at once. If the ylaws get the changes they need this could be put in too. What do you think?