Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'two-thirds vote'.
Guest posted a topic in General DiscussionCurrently the club I belong a few of the board members are proposing amendments to the bylaws that take away all membership voting rights contained in our bylaws, leaving all decisions in the boards hands alone. Also proposed are extending unlimited board (officers/directors) terms at their discretion and taking out the provisions of informing the membership of meetings/agenda. Currently, even though our bylaws state they must provide time/date, agenda and post minutes of meetings, they provide us none of these items. It is my understanding, that this goes against parliamentary rules in general. In addition, I believe I read in RONR somewhere (cannot find it now) that an exception to majority rule was that 2/3 vote from the membership is required for any bylaw change that takes away members rights. Is this true? Is it 2/3 of the quorum required or total voting membership? I also believe, I read in RONR that people (our board) "should" refrain on voting on these changes because they are self serving. Can anyone help us to prevent this by furnishing proper citations and proper procedure from RONR to strengthen our arguments against this? We are at a loss as to how to proceed to do this to keep our rights as voting members. 2 of our current board members are against these changes and furnished some of our members copies. These board members told us they are going to sneak the required notification of bylaw changes before the annual meeting by posting a link to the changes buried in an article in our newsletter in an attempt to get a lower turn out for the annual meeting of uninformed people. Did I mention that the bylaws committee is only comprised of 2 board members? HELP!
Guest posted a topic in General DiscussionFirst question: How do you calculate a majority (51%) for an odd number of members? For example, 51% of 12 is 7 (50% is 6 and you need one more vote than 50%). But, for 11, 50% is 5.5 members and one more is 6.5 or 7 when rounded up. But, if you multiply 7 by .51, you get 5.61 which is 6 when rounded up. Second question: At what decimal point do you round up for a two-thirds vote. For example, two-thirds of 12 is 8.0004, two-thirds of 15 is 10.005, two-thirds of 19 is 12.673, and two-thirds of 20 is 13.34. For two-thirds of 19 and 20, I can see rounding up to 13 and to 14, respectively, but for 12 and 15, it seems that two-thirds should be 8 and 10, respectively. Thanks, Betty.
“No rule protecting a minority of a particular size can be suspended in the face of a negative vote as large as the minority protected by the rule” ([11th ed.], p. 261, ll. 15–17). But the “vote required for adoption” of Suspend the Rules is two-thirds, “except where the rule protects a minority of less than one third” (tinted p. 27). (1) Can a rule that protects 10 members be suspended by a vote of 20-10? Page 261 says no, but tinted p. 27 indicates yes. Should tinted p. 27 say “less than or equal to one third”? (2) As I understand the general principle, suspending a rule that protects a minority of less than or equal to one-third requires a vote greater than two-thirds. In other words, if m = number of members present and voting n = number of members protected by a rule (n ≤ m/3) v = vote necessary for adoption then v > (m – n). Is it okay to have a mathematical difference like this, rather than a fraction, for “the proportion that must concur” (p. 402, l. 26)? How should the chair announce the voting result? What should a tellers’ report say is “necessary for adoption”?