Search the Community

We have some 60 members in our guild with 4 executive board members. Our bylaws do not have anything on what constitutes a quorum. We meet regularly - so if a vote is taken and there is a question on whether we have a quorum - how would this be answered? Thank you

A majority of directors is needed to hold a board meeting. A majority of members is needed to hold an association meeting. But there is no mention of how many board directors are also needed to hold an association meeting. IIs a majority of directors necessary, too, for the association meeting to occur?

I know that the president of an organization doesn't count toward quorum if the bylaws specify that they are ex officio members of every committee. Does this extend to other officers with a similar provision? In our organization, the chair and both vice chairs are ex officio members of every committee. With five appointed members and three ex officio members, does that make our quorum five (majority of 8), four (majority of 7), or three (majority of 5)?

At one of our meetings after the football season (2017-2018) started, a vote to determine whether the NFL games would be shown on our televisions at our organization was taken. The majority vote was to not have any NFL games shown. No exemptions were made at the time. This past week one of our officers called for an impromptu quorum of five (5) in order to address whether to show the Super Bowl game next month, February 2018. (Our next meeting will not have convened until after the Super Bowl game.) The quorum voted to show the Super Bowl game. Was this officer correct in convening a quorum thereby bypassing the memberships' vote to not have any football games shown or was the officer wrong?

The term "majority of a quorum" baffles me. It seems (1) redundant and (2) ambiguous. Redundant because a vote cannot be taken without a quorum present so why specify "majority of a quorum?" Ambiguous because it would seem to be subject to interpretation. Suppose an organization has 24 member and the bylaws state that 25% of the membership constitutes a quorum. Then 6 members would make up a quorum and 4 would be a majority of a quorum. Then suppose 20 members are present for the vote. A majority of those present would now be 11. Now 16 people vote in favor of the motion and 4 oppose. A majority of a quorum opposed. Does the motion fail? That's silly, of course, but in a world where millions of dollars can rest on the presence or absence of an "Oxford comma," it seems strange to use an ambiguous and redundant phrase. Any comments?

Is a quorum required of a School Board if they are offering a time for public comment and then having a work session on budget, school attendance zone changes, etc and no votes (straw or official) are being taken at the public meeting?

Good day! My question is this. At a special meeting for a bylaw change, can an alternate for the BOD replace an absent member of the BOD for the purpose of obtaining a quorum?

I have a group that I am working with that has a 2/3 requirement for quorum. The board has 6 members, so 2/3 would be 4. Do they need 4 plus the chair designated in their bylaws to conduct a meeting, meaning that 5 would actually need to be present? Or would they have quorum with just any 4 members even if the designated chair is absent? Additionally, this is not a regularly called meeting of the board. Their bylaws specifically state that only the president can call special meetings and he did not. The other board members are attempting to hold a special meeting without the president and vice-president (the designated chair) present. Would this be allowed under Robert's Rules? Thank you!

Hello and good afternoon. We are relatively inexperienced in parliamentary procedure and appreciate any guidance. We are a small voluntary service organization (approx. 110 members) with a BOD with minimum of five elected officers but can be expanded up to 10 because of Chairs of Committees. Per bylaws, all people on BOD must be active, paid members of the organization. Our bylaws state we must have an annual meeting with elections. Bylaws also state that any membership meeting (which includes our annual meeting) must have 15 members for quorum. We just had our annual meeting and held elections. We had exactly 15 people present if you include BOD persons; we had 17 votes when you add in the mailed in absentee ballots. So we are not sure if we had quorum. One person states that BOD people don't count towards quorum. One person says that in membership meetings where BOD are required to members, that yes, they do count. Also, let's say only 14 people show up but we have over 15 votes because of mail in ballots, do the people who mailed in a ballot count towards quorum.

Our bylaws do not have a provision that defines quorum. At our meetings, we say that quorum is established. How is quorum determined and established if we don't have a provision? Is there some type of default percentage? Thank you for any assistance. Heading to Barnes and Noble this evening to pick up a new book!

Our corporate bylaws have no provision for what constitutes a quorum at a meeting for members. At our AGM last year the board called a quorum as members present. Since then the board has read in Robert's rules that a quorum should be a majority of the members. Our membership is under 100. At a recent special meeting (requisitioned by the members) of members for a discussion only the board declared that a quorum was not present and the mtg should be adjourned to another day and time, but an informal discussion could take place. However, the members pushed back and said precedence had been set by the AGM of allowing a quorum of members present. So the board, not wanting to cause a scene allowed the meeting to move forward. Is the Board wrong for allowing the meeting to formally continue, or are the members correct that a prescidence has been set.? It was also noted that there are other parliamentary rules for conducting mtg that have a different take on quorum.

Part of a global organization, where quorum is sometimes hard to get. There was a special GA and online attendance was used, but the way that they informed members of online attendance and voting was not the most transparent but instead the Executive chose a few members to attend to ensure they reached quorum. The bylaws allow under special cases for electronic attendance. Would it be possible for subsequent GA to call into question quorum and hence the decision made during that GA? If so, what would be needed in terms of votes etc?

A 5 member school board generally follows Robert's Rules (the bylaws are woefully inadequate and make no mention of resignations). One member had a recall election pending, and on the last day possible, he tendered his resignation to the Superintendent and the Election Officer. This was good enough for the Election Officer, who cancelled the election. But the school requires his resignation to be accepted by the school board. The semi-recalled board member convinced 2 other members to follow him out the door (turning resignation letters in to the Superintendent, but refusing to attend a meeting), leaving only 2 members who cannot make a quorum. If the member had been forcibly removed from his position, would it still need to be accepted by the board? Because his resignation was tendered to the Election Officer, does that change anything? Could his spot be appointed outside of session by the Board President due to his removal? Is there anything that can be done in this situation?