2021Bylaws

Bylaws (Iowa)

1974 Proceedings, p. 27. Neither the Potentate nor the Board of directors of a temple may create additional temple offices, for which provision may be made only by the temple bylaws pursuant to §325.7. 1993 Proceedings, p. 123. Employment of a Noble by the temple does not disqualify such employee from seeking an elective office in the temple. In the event a conflict or duality of interest arises, action, as may be appropriate under the circumstances, must be taken. § 325.8 1993 Proceedings, p. 172. The provision that “nominating committees are prohibited” was deleted by vote of the Representatives at the 1993 annual session. 1995 Proceedings, p. 144. The practice of suspending the rules in order that unopposed nominees may be elected by the casting of one ballot comes within the exception expressed in Roberts Rules of Order, Newly Revised. § 325.9 1983 Proceedings, p. 212. A proposed amendment to a templeʼs bylaws which makes the chief rabban a representative to The Imperial Council by virtue of his office is in conflict with the bylaws of The Imperial Council. All Representatives are to be elected by written bal- lot at the annual meeting of the temple. 2003 Proceedings, p. 187. The report of the Leadership Search Committee, as well as any nominations it makes, should not contain statements about other candidates considered and why a particular candidate under consideration did not receive the endorsement of the committee. § 325.11 1971 Proceedings, p. 97. The distribution among members of the temple of an “informa- tion sheet” containing the name of a proposed candidate for temple office and listing his Masonic history, military service record, and civilian work record is a violation of §325. 10(a) even though the office to which he aspires is not mentioned. 1972 Proceedings, p. 154. The editors of unit and Shrine Club newsletters are responsible for violations of §325.11(a) in publishing solicitations for support of candidates for temple office. 1972 Proceedings, p. 153. A temple bylaw provision which prohibits the expenditure of money for gifts, favors or entertainment on behalf of candidates for temple office is not inconsistent with Article 25. 1975 Proceedings, p. 19. A temple is free to regulate campaigns for temple office so long as the regulations are consistent with Article 25 of the Imperial bylaws; but without a trial under Article 30, only the Imperial Potentate may suspend one who violates such regulations or declare the election void. 1981 Proceedings, p. 165. Election of Imperial Representatives at a second meeting instead of at the annual meeting and without notice of election required by §325.10(c) is improper, and a new election with proper notice is required. 1983 Proceedings, p. 212. The distribution of written material to the members of a temple by a Noble thereof opposing the re-election of the recorder by asserting in the material, inter alia, that “itʼs time for a change” is a violation of §335.10(a). 1987 Proceedings, p. 119. “Distribution and circulation of pin-on button containing the name of a candidate, violates this section.” 1988 Proceedings, p. 238. “Organizational meeting” of Divan, and Unit Heads prior to tem- ple election based upon “presumption of election” does not constitute a violation of this article. 1988 Proceedings, p. 238. Pre-preparation and distribution of “sample ballot” contain- ing suggestions of proper choice for various offices is in violation of this section. 1996 Proceedings, p. 143. It is a violation of Shrine law for a Shrine club newsletter to list the names of proposed, suggested or recommended candidates for temple office, either directly or indirectly. 2002 Proceedings, p.157. The Imperial Potentate, under this section, has the authority to declare a Noble who authored and distributed an article announcing his candidacy for office, ineligible to seek the office during the year 2002.

ANNOTAT I ONS

164