View Single Post
  #2  
Old 06-10-2008, 10:53 AM
emb021 emb021 is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 696
The benefits of having a Nominating Committee put forth a complete slate of candidates, is that you are assured that you do, in fact, have a complete slate.

Ideally, the NomCom should be a small group who should look at all possible candidates (ie, all who are eligable in the group) and decide who they think would be best for the org, AND check to ensure that the proposed candidate is willing to run.

Keep in mind that that is the ideal. The NomCom is not omnipoten. There may be other good candidates out there they are just no aware of. And there is always the issue that the NomCom may NOT select the right people, but fall victim to an 'old boys' network attitude.

As noted, once the NomCom reports the slate, nominations from the floor (ie the whole group) should be allowed. This ensure that other candidates who do want to run, who may have been overlooked by the NomCom, can be considered. One of the worse things your org can do is deny this and just elect the whole slate as a group, as if the NomCom is the group that picks your new officers and the group just 'approves' this.


Also, if your group uses Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised as their parliamentary authority, you are not IN ANYWAY required to use a NomCom. An organization is always free to do things the way they want. RONR is always below your Bylaws and Special Rules of Order. (I'm a parliamentarian, btw)
__________________
Michael Brown
APO LM & TB
Chapter Advisor
Section 71 Chair
Reply With Quote