SR6N Elections

[LodgeChief]

This past weekend (April 22-24) my section, SR6N, held it's annual elections. I was running for Vice-Chief of the Section unopposed all weekend. When Sunday rolled around the Host Lodge's chief decided he was going to run. At first the Section Chief said no, but later changed his mind because he extended the deadline for your paperwork to be turned in last year. We had to fill out a sheet saying why we thought that we were good candidates and it had to be signed by our Scout Executive or by his representative (per the Field Operations Guide). Our deadline to have it in was noon Sat. They let him run and he beat me. I feel that he had the advantage over me because his lodge put on a good conclave. I also felt that I got the shaft because the Section broke their own rules and let him run. I am upset about this but I now know that I have to start working for next year's election were I will be running for Section Chief because I have the aspirations to become a National Officer and I am almost too old. What do you all think?

 

[Proud Eagle]

The FOG only goes so far as to say that a candidate must have his Scout Executives approval in writing in advance of being nominated. As long as that approval was given before he was nominated, it seems to be OK according to the FOG.

 

The FOG also states that nominations shall be closed only once, immediately before voting for that office. (Chapter 2, Rule IV, B).

 

In years past the correct paperwork was required by some certain point in the conclave. The theory was this requirement was necessary to give the section chief and adviser time to confirm that the paperwork was complete and the SE had approved the candidate, and that all other requirements were met.

 

However, last year there was a dispute of some sort and it was decided that the rule about the paperwork deadline may not be in keeping with the FOG. (I personally think it is within the power of the COC to determine what constitutes a reasonable and proper amount of time to certify a candidate, but others apparently don't share that opinion.)

 

Now, I don't know when our new VC had his papers turned in. As long as they were turned in before he was nominated, I suppose everything was technically done correctly.

 

On the other hand there is the issue of fundamental fairness. The other candidates for office all turned in their papers and were nominated earlier in the weekend. All other candidates participated in the candidate forum on Saturday night, giving a chance for thorough questioning of them (unlike the Sunday morning meeting where time was very limited). Also, all other candidates provided information to be published in the on-sight newsletter so everyone would know something about them. It seems unfair to everyone involved that someone would run but not participate.

 

That being said, I don't think the host lodge chief had any intention of running at the start of the weekend. I think he was encouraged to run at some point. I can also easily see how he might not have gotten around to making a final decision until the last minute, after all the host lodge people are quite busy during conclave. So, I place no fault on the new section vice chief.

 

Instead I must place some blame on the general pattern of section politics. The section seems to trend toward far too much political intrigue, behind the scenes deals, and all sort of stuff beyond the knowledge of ordinary Arrowmen. The outcomes of section elections often seem to be determined well before the lodge members are polled. Also, while I can't confirm it, I am relatively certain most of the chiefs vote according to their own inclinations rather than following the wishes of their lodge members.

 

I have never been very good at the section politics thing. Mostly because I have never been well enough informed to be good at it. That was true when I was a lodge chief, and it is true now as a lodge adviser.

[LodgeChief]

Thanks. Are you from Kawida or White Horse, if you want to say that is. I did have one more question that I forgot to mention. Can I move to close the nominations. I tried to do that after looking around and inspecting people around me. There was a reasonable pause to make such a motion. I moved it with the Section Chief and Adviser standing right in front of me. The chief ignored me, he didn't even tell me that I couldn't do it. I was sure after that if I could make such a motion or if it was up to the chief to declare nominations opened or closed.

[purcelce]

All I can say is that life stinks. But you look at this as a learning experience and move on.

 

Here's a little story.

 

Last year I gave to scouts til it "hurt".

 

I did about 14 FOS presentations and worked the phones for donations.

Was Lodge Advisor to the Secretary.

Gave time as UC and Assistant SM.

Was asked to be on Outdoor Leader Training Staff.

Started a new Venturing Crew that took off.

Worked 9 weeks for the council camps as Aquatics director and gave my pay back to the council.

Chaired the District fall camporee and got it going.

District Commissioner asked me to take over an ADC slot and I did.

 

When the district dinner came along in Feb. said to myself, "You should be a shoe in for the District Award of Merit" My name wasn't called and I was in shock. Those who got deserved it, and I congratulated them and left the dinner with a little disappointment and a bad taste in my mouth. When I got home I started looking at some scouting pictures of the past year and saw how much fun the youth had around me. Then I had a "vision". I'm not in Scouting for me; I'm in it for the youth. I started to remember the many youth faces that I touched throughout the year. I remembered some of the lines from the youth: "Thanks for making Lifesaving merit badge fun". "The only reason I come to OA functions is because you make it fun". "I wish you were my Scoutmaster." "I would of drop out of scouts if it wasn't for the awesome time I had at the waterfront." "Give me an application, I want to join your crew."

 

So I didn't get my pat on the back at the dist dinner. I got my pat on the back by seeing how many youth, directly and indirectly; I had an influence (a good influence) on in 2004.

 

WWW

 

purcelce

 

[Proud Eagle]

As for my lodge, if you look at my profile you can figure it out, I think.

 

As for a motion to close the floor for nominations, I don't realy know if that motion is in order or not. I have never been a section officer or adviser, so I haven't ever had a reason to know exactly. The FOG makes it quite clear the nominations can only be closed once, and that it must be immediately before the vote is taken. So I don't know if a motion to close the floor was in order or if the floor is simply closed automatically.

 

I seem to recall that it has been done both ways in the past. I also seem to remember it being done both ways during lodge/chapter functions.

 

I think it is probably actually the duty of the person presiding over the election to close the floor. If the a motion is made, that would require a vote to close the floor, which seems a bit overly involved.

 

Robert's Rules of Order anyone?

[mdutch]

According to Roberts Rules of Order, 10th ED Newly Revised (page 277), motions to close nominations require a 2/3 vote to be approved and are not in order when someone else wants to make a nomination. Instead of making the motion the chair can simply ask "are there any other nominations" (and if nobody responds, the floor is closed.

 

So, Proud Eagle is correct, it can just be closed by the chair, or by a motion AND a vote. Either way, if someone still wants to make a nomination, the floor can not be closed.