Majority of quorum

[louanne111]

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?

Edited December 14, 2017 at 03:11 PM by louanne111
arithmetic

[George Mervosh]

There is no such phrase in RONR, for good reason.  If it's in a set of governing documents you're reading that group will have to figure out what it means.

[Dan Honemann]

It may help to take a look at this thread in the Advanced Discussion Forum.

[Richard Brown]

It's discussed at some length in this thread, too, which in turn makes reference to the thread cited by Mr. Honemann:  http://robertsrules.forumflash.com/topic/27659-majority-of-a-quorum-or-23-of-a-quorum/

I would consider the post by Mr. Honemann authoritative.