Quorum for voting; quorum for annual meeting

[Guest Jeannie Wood]

We seem to have conflicting statements in our By-Laws:

 

1. Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the proceedings of all Business Meetings of the Membership.
    
2. A quorum for actions at the annual Business Meetings of the Membership shall consist of one-fifth (1/5) of the Members in good standing.  The total numbers of Members present at a meeting and the number of absentee ballots shall be used to determine that a quorum exists. 

The debate is this: 

a) RRO says a quorum in all Business Meetings is based on the number of Members present at the meeting.

Our By-Laws are being interpreted that the combination of "early/absentee" ballots AND the members present constitute a meeting quorum.

 

Example, with 550 members, one-fifth quorum for a meeting is 110.  The annual meeting then could have 100 absentee votes and 10 members present at the meeting and still be within the By-Laws.  My argument is that the combination of absentee votes and members voting at the meeting is the quorum for voting; not the quorum for meetings.

[jstackpo]

There is no such thing as a "quorum for voting".  A quorum, per RONR, p. 345, is simply enough people (members, of course) present to do business at a meeting.

 

In your case the bylaws supersede RONR, so you will have a quorum "present" when you combine the people physically present PLUS those absentee ballots, as long as that total meets or exceeds 1/5 of your membership.

[Josh Martin]

The debate is this: 

a) RRO says a quorum in all Business Meetings is based on the number of Members present at the meeting.

Our By-Laws are being interpreted that the combination of "early/absentee" ballots AND the members present constitute a meeting quorum.

 

Your bylaws take precedence over RONR.

 

For the sake of clarity, it may be wise to amend the provision in your bylaws regarding the parliamentary authority to read "The rules contained in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the Society in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with these bylaws and any special rules of order the Society may adopt."

 

I would note that RONR strongly advises against mixing and matching votes at a meeting with absentee votes.

 

My argument is that the combination of absentee votes and members voting at the meeting is the quorum for voting; not the quorum for meetings.

 

I don't buy that argument, and I'm not entirely sure what that distinction is supposed to mean. What would happen if a meeting did not have a quorum "for meeting" but had a quorum "for voting?"

[Guest Edgar]

 . . . you will have a quorum "present" when you combine the people physically present PLUS those absentee ballots, as long as that total meets or exceeds 1/5 of your membership.

 

That seems like a reasonable interpretation of the rules cited but the rules seem to presuppose that there will be absentee ballots cast for all (or most) meetings and that seems unlikely. Further, absentee ballots might be cast for only one question but the meeting, having a "quorum", would be free to entertain additional motions (with, say, only ten members present).

[Guest Greg]

That seems like a reasonable interpretation of the rules cited but the rules seem to presuppose that there will be absentee ballots cast for all (or most) meetings and that seems unlikely. Further, absentee ballots might be cast for only one question but the meeting, having a "quorum", would be free to entertain additional motions (with, say, only ten members present).

 

Yep, a ticklish, maybe even picklish situation... 

 

We see (one reason) why "...RONR strongly advises against mixing and matching votes at a meeting with absentee votes." (quoting Josh)

[Josh Martin]

That seems like a reasonable interpretation of the rules cited but the rules seem to presuppose that there will be absentee ballots cast for all (or most) meetings and that seems unlikely. Further, absentee ballots might be cast for only one question but the meeting, having a "quorum", would be free to entertain additional motions (with, say, only ten members present).

 

If the membership only has meetings annually (and the bylaws seem to suggest this is the case), I'm not sure it's that unlikely that absentee ballots will be cast for all (or most) meetings, although I agree on the second point.

[Guest Guest]

As long as the pickles don't sour.  Thanks, all, for your feedback.  I passed it on to our Board.

[Guest Ron Ernst]

Can unsigned absentee ballots be created by the hoa board to force an annual meeting quorum?

Guest-Ron

[jstackpo]

Not unless the bylaws authorize the board to go into the counterfiting business.

 

Seems quite unlikely.

 

BTW, it is best if you start a new topic with a new question (even on a related subject).  Easier to keep track that way.

[Gary Novosielski]

Can unsigned absentee ballots be created by the hoa board to force an annual meeting quorum?

Guest-Ron

 

You mean can the board create fake ballots?  I think you know the answer to that.