Search the Community

I chair the Rules Committee for our HOA. It's a small committee-5 now but our Board is adding a 6th member. Suggestions on how to break tie votes would be appreciated. Should I, as chair, abstain from all future votes? Should we require an uneven number of committee members?

We held our council elections. The person won president by a 38-37 vote count. Later an uncounted ballot was found which would've tied the vote count at 38-38. Can a special election be called or does the election stand as is ?

The Bylaws of the Community HOA where we live state that member voting may be made in person, or by Proxy (See below) Bylaws: At all meetings of Members, each Member may vote in person or by proxy. All proxies shall be in writing, dated, and filed with the Secretary before the appointed time of each meeting. When membership meeting notices are sent to homeowners, the instructions on the Proxy Statement always contain the following statement: Such proxy is authorized to vote in his or her discretion on any matter properly brought before the meeting for which the undersigned has given no directions as to the manner of casting the undersigned’s vote My question relates to the "for which the undersigned has given no directions" part of the statement. That part of the statement can provide the opportunity for any homeowner, or the Board of Directors, to cast more than one vote on any issue before the Membership Body. Question: Would it be in order to make a motion to request that the teller of the votes state the number of 'affirmative' and 'negative' Proxy votes when the results of the vote count is given? And, if in order, when should the motion be made? Before the question at issue is put to the assembly?

If it is the responsibility of the president to appoint committee chairs and a vote of the B.O.D. is required to approval the appointments. Is the President as a member of the B.O.D. allowed to vote. I was told that since the president is appointing the chairs that they are now considered bias and should remove him(her)self from the vote.

Are voice votes, standing votes, raised hand votes, roll-call votes, ballot votes all considered to be votes cast after the voting is done?

My Not for Profit Board voted to remove a member. The board, including the member being removed, is a total of 12 people. Our Bylaws state this: Expulsion or suspension from the board will require the vote of a 3/4 majority of the full board of directors. A vote is taken and the votes come back as follows: receive 8 votes to remove the member, 2 votes to keep and 1 abstains. They did not let the member being voted out have a vote. Since the total number of Board members is 12, per the Bylaws, it requires 3/4 vote of the FULL board of directors. They are saying it passed because 8 out of 10 is more than 3/4. But our Bylaws state the Full board of directors, not just votes received. Did the vote pass? I say no. Am I wrong?

Our organization, non-profit, is run by a Board of Trustees. Members of our organization have called for a special meeting. At this meeting, a motion may come to the floor that the BOT temporarily suspend work that they are doing. Our By-Laws do not address whether or not the BOT is bound to follow the vote of the organization. Does Robert's Rules have an answer to this situation?

An agenda item (Approval of Board Agenda) was briefly discussed during the board meeting. The Chair asked if there were any abstentions. The Board replied no. No motion or vote was entertained to approve the baord agenda. Should the minutes be noted to reflect the oversight and have it address at the next Board meeting?

I recently brought up a motion at are regular membership meeting. The motion was discussed and voted on, it passed pending the submission of a certain document. I submitted the necessary document to our President a few days before our Executive Board meeting where I was under the impression that the motion was explained the Executive Board would vote on the motion and the matter would be done with. At the Executive Board meeting I was told that since it was originally brought up at the membership meeting that it would have to go back before them to be voted on again. I don't believe that this is the proper procedure under Roberts Rules of Order. Would appreciate any information that anyone could give me or direct me to the section in Roberts Rules that I can print out so that I can actually find out if I'm right or if our President is right. You can contact me direct at Coastie55@aol.com Thanks Bob

Yesterday my faculty senate voted effectively on two resolutions which our leadership opposes. One was a resolution against closing an campus center that was slated to close that day. Afterward, the chancellor called the director and told her that until he got official minutes and votes he would proceed with the closure. He then wrote the chair of the senate (who seems unwilling to advocate on behalf of the faculty) to say that he expected the minutes and notification of the votes taken. He sat through the entire meeting. Are such expectations parliamentary?

The bylaws of an organization to which I belong closes nominations three months prior to the AGM and does not allow for nominations from the floor. The current members of the board are tired and could use some fresh voices and energy. Would write-in votes on the ballots be considered valid, even though the assembly as a whole would not have been aware of them? Oh - one more point: Traditionally, elections are held by marking "yes" or "no" beside each name, with the candidates receiving more "yes" votes being elected. Does this practice (which I have not been able to find in the bylaws anywhere) complicate any possible write-in votes?

While conducting an online board meetings, several hot topic motions are presented, seconded, and are needing votes. There are 15 members. One is on vacation, one quit (due to the nature of the entire reason of the motions), one is out sick, and one is the president (to which this is about). This leaves 11. But only 6 have voted, all in favor. Because of the nature of the Board's issue, I suspect several will not vote to keep from backlash, and diving friendships. What happens when we do not get the 2/3 votes? These subsidiary motions are tying up the original motion that desperately needs attention.

We a board that is made up of 16 reps. We have 1 vacancy now leaving us with 15 representatives that are eligible to vote, including the president. We have 4 candidates for office. We know that 8 is quorum based on majority of the 15. How many votes does a candidate need to have... assuming all 15 vote and there are no abstentions?

Recently, an organization I belong to was called upon to vote on a replacement for a resigning director of the board. In this particular organization, there are a number of affiliated clubs - each having the option of electing or appointing a club representative who can attend board meetings and vote on any issues at hand. After our most recent election, one of the newly elected directors also happens to be a representative of an affiliated club. Our president suggested that this individual could actually vote TWICE on issues brought before the Board - once as a director, and once as an affiliated club representative. I heartily disagree. I say that the newly elected director must relinquish their position as club representative and have that club elect or appoint a new representative. The director should have ONE vote only on issues brought before the Board. I could not, however, find a specific reference to this issue in RRO. What say you?

A director from the 5 member Board resigned early right after the election of two new directors. The remaining four will be appointing a new director. Two board member want to appoint the 3rd candidate in the recent election and she has accepted. The other two director want to appoint a new member who they think will work better as a team member than the candidate. What do you do with a tie vote?

Okay, I was wrong. I'm not finished with my questions. And quite honestly, the more I read here, the more questions pop into my head. Fortunately, I can also usually find the answer as well if I keep reading. (And I'm now halfway through the Complete Idiot's Guide to Robert's Rules, which has been very helpful in understanding my (brand-spanking new) copy of the 11th edition of RONR.) I am trying to figure out what exactly we have as our "majority" in our bylaws draft. It reads, "All resolutions shall require a simple majority vote, except for the following special resolutions...[A, B, and C] require a two-thirds majority, and [C and D] require a three-fourths majority." Is this too ambiguous? Someone suggested that we use, "All resolutions shall require a simple majority vote of those eligible to vote at a validly called meeting, except for the following special resolutions..." To me, this latter suggestion gives us what we *don't* want. We (presumably) don't want to be constantly counting voters at various points in each meeting to determine what the majority will be for any given vote, which is why we (so far) haven't included the italicized portion. But have we acheived our desire with the wording we used? It seems to me that, according to page 400, lines 8-12 of RONR (11th ed.), that our wording as we have it does just that...but I'd like to be certain now, *before* we have our bylaws meeting. Wow. That was long. I apologize for being so verbose. Louise

At a recent meeting where a vote was taken by the Board of Directors of an Association there were 8 members present which constituted a quorum. Two of the members do not have a vote by virtue of their office: Chairperson (who is VP by in the position of chair because the President elect died), and the past president who also does not have a vote. Therefore, only 6 members voted on an issue. My question is how is a simple or 2/3 majority decided on - based on the 6 people eligible to vote or the 8 people (two without a vote) who were present? It seems strange to me that 2 non-voters could have a huge impact on the outcome of a vote which in this case was a serious one - the reinstatement of a board member after an automatyic suspension for missing some board meetings. The Board argued that quorum was 8 despite the fact that 2 people could not vote and that the majority would be calulated based on 8 people present, not the 6 people voting? Which is correct? Cheers, and thanks

Is it allowable under Roberts Rules to have four (4) votes under one motion - as an example, there was a motion to take action on A, B, C & D reuiring 4 y/n votes - ie. y,n,n,y.

Our congregation holds its annual meeting in January 2012, notice was sent to all members of meeting and topics to be discussed. At the annual meeting this year, the agenda was formally accepted with two items of business to be dealt with: 1. election of new board members 2. approval of the budget for the new year- and no other business was on the agenda. Business was dealt with according to the agenda, and then when we were about to close, an individual rose and was recognized by the chair. The individual made a motion that the congregation reverse a very controversial action taken in the annual meeting in January 2010's meeting. (This action had been handled "legally" the 2011 meeting in that it had been in the notification for 2011 meeting that the issue would be voted on). This year it was not on the agenda, and it had not been publicized that it would be discussed. Prior to the adoption of the agenda, this was not even mentioned, which would have been the appropriate time to add it to the agenda. The chair allowed the vote to occur although caution was given that it should not be, since it was not on the agenda. Many individuals who had great interest in that topic would have been there had there been notification of it's coming to the floor for a vote. The chair allowed the vote and it passed by 16 votes to reverse the action in prior years meeting. Many people are upset that this was allowed to occur. Was this action out of order or not and if so, what is the remedy? Thanks

If the bylaws call for a 51% majority and that turns out to be a fractional number, how is the fraction treated? For example, 51% of 145 voting members = 73.95. Does it require 73 or 74 votes to pass?

I have looked into the 11th edition of RR and tried to find the answer to this. Our Board is trying to negotiate a settlement in a lawsuit. The lawyers asked us to go into closed session to discuss our offer to settle. We went into executive session. We took a vote in the closed session on our next steps. Now a member is telling us that the actual vote should have been taken in open session. Even though we can keep the topic of the motion confidential. This seems unreasonable, and basically useless. But I thought I'd ask here. May the Board take a vote in closed/executive session without recording the results of the vote in the minutes of the open meeting? OR do the votes stay in the minutes of the executive session. Thanks