The Charter of Østgarðr sets the length of officers’ terms to two years, with no term limits other than what is specified in kingdom law: a maximum of four years for seneschals or exchequers, with no maximum for other offices.
But as we approach this year’s elections, we reviewed the relevant kingdom documentation and stumbled on what seemed like an overriding provision that was recently added to the policies of the East Kingdom Exchequer’s office.
I.B. Duration of terms
1. First term in office is two years.
2. Subsequent terms in office are one year each.
3. Branches may define their own terms, so long as they do not exceed
Did paragraph I.B.2. mean that a sitting exchequer couldn’t renew for a second two-year term, as that would “exceed” the one-year duration?
I wrote to the kingdom exchequer for clarification:
I one of the people who wrote and maintain the local charter (formerly “bylaws”) for Østgarðr, and I’m writing to you about the Term Limit Policy issued by your office last month.
My question is not about the four-year term limit (section A) — I’m only asking about the duration of terms (section B).
Our local branch deliberately set up a structure of two-year terms with the seneschal and exchequer being elected in alternating years to minimize the likelihood of those two offices turning over at the same time, so as to provide a greater degree of stability and continuity for our local group’s financial committee.
Do we need to change our current practice of having exchequers serve either one or two terms of two years each?
Thank you for your consideration,
— Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
I was pleased to receive a prompt response later that day which confirmed that “… every branch… is free to set their own term durations… so long as duration in office does not exceed four years.”
So, it seems like I.B.3. is actually intended to say that “Branches may define their own terms, so long as they do not exceed the limits of paragraph I.A.1.”
I’m glad this was so easily resolved!