Guest Voting Member Posted May 23, 2011 at 08:54 PM Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 at 08:54 PM Our California non-profit organization has the phrase ""Two-thirds vote of the members present and voting" in it to pass an Amendment. It is clear when a member completely abstains from voting at all (not considered a 'no' vote), but what happens when a member votes for all other items on ballot but either abstains purposely or just misses the item and does not vote for that item? Is this member considered as a 'voting' member still? Or do we apply Abstention guidelines per item voted upon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted May 23, 2011 at 09:00 PM Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 at 09:00 PM do we apply Abstention guidelines per item voted upon?Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted May 23, 2011 at 09:01 PM Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 at 09:01 PM A member can partially abstain (RONR p. 394). He voted on the questions that he voted on and abstained on the questions he didn't vote on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Voting Member Posted May 23, 2011 at 09:22 PM Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 at 09:22 PM Thanks for such quick response. This will alleviate a lot of arguing this evening. Appreciate it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M Yusuf Bora Posted June 11, 2011 at 05:03 AM Report Share Posted June 11, 2011 at 05:03 AM Bylaws amendment requires at any annual or special meeting of the general membership a two-thirds (2/3) majority vote of the active members present and voting:Ballots Issued : 143Aye : 93Ne: 45Abstain/Not Voting: 5Did the Amendment get 2/3 votes?A. 93/(93+45) = 67.3% (If we do not count abstained/Not Voting)B. 93/(93+45+5)= 65.0% (If we count abstained/Not Voting)Please advise which one is correct? A or B?Thanks for your help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Goldsworthy Posted June 11, 2011 at 06:48 AM Report Share Posted June 11, 2011 at 06:48 AM Bylaws amendment requires at any annual or special meeting of the general membership a two-thirds (2/3) majority vote of the active members present and voting:Ballots Issued : 143Aye : 93Ne: 45Abstain/Not Voting: 5Did the Amendment get 2/3 votes?A. 93/(93+45) = 67.3% (If we do not count abstained/Not Voting)B. 93/(93+45+5)= 65.0% (If we count abstained/Not Voting)Please advise which one is correct? A or B?Thanks for your help"Present and voting" means BOTH.• If present and NOT VOTING, then that person or that (blank?) ballot won't count.• If NOT PRESENT and voting, then that person or that ballot won't count.You don't count the 5 abstentions.QUIZQ. Given you don't count abstentions at all, then what formula do you have left which excludes abstentions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted June 11, 2011 at 11:36 AM Report Share Posted June 11, 2011 at 11:36 AM Bylaws amendment requires at any annual or special meeting of the general membership a two-thirds (2/3) majority vote of the active members present and voting:Ballots Issued : 143Aye : 93Ne: 45Abstain/Not Voting: 5Did the Amendment get 2/3 votes?A. 93/(93+45) = 67.3% (If we do not count abstained/Not Voting)B. 93/(93+45+5)= 65.0% (If we count abstained/Not Voting)Please advise which one is correct? A or B?Thanks for your helpA.Although it bears mentioning that a 2/3 majority vote has a bit of inherent conflict in it. Majority means more than half, and 2/3 means... well, 2/3. They define two different voting thresholds. The two phrases (2/3 and majority) really don't really belong together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanh49 Posted June 11, 2011 at 05:18 PM Report Share Posted June 11, 2011 at 05:18 PM A.Although it bears mentioning that a 2/3 majority vote has a bit of inherent conflict in it. Majority means more than half, and 2/3 means... well, 2/3. They define two different voting thresholds. The two phrases (2/3 and majority) really don't really belong together.Sorry but I do not see any conflict a 2/3 vote and a 2/3 majority vote mean the same thing A majority is more than 1/2 two thirds is more than 1/2 so two thirds is a majority it's just a majority of a certain size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M Yusuf Bora Posted June 11, 2011 at 06:11 PM Report Share Posted June 11, 2011 at 06:11 PM Thanks Alan, David & Kim for your prompt reply.I am the Parliamentarian of the non-profit organization and I need validation from three sources, (responses) so I can say with confidence if the amendment was approved or not?.Anyone else who wants to chime in will be greatly appreciated. I wanted to keep it simple, either A or B. (And the explaination would be welcome.)Thanks again,RegardsYusuf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted June 12, 2011 at 05:29 AM Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 at 05:29 AM [snip] ... and I need validation from three sources, (responses) [snip]Whyever would you need three sources? Isn't Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, Tenth Edition (2000) authoritative enough? Whatever might anyone find lacking as a definitive answer here other than, say, p. 388?And if you really need three people to tell your members the same thing, why won't Mr Goldsworthy, Mr Foulkes, and Alan H. do?[Edited to satisfy OCD requirements] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M Yusuf Bora Posted June 12, 2011 at 02:08 PM Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 at 02:08 PM Whyever would you need three sources? Isn't Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, Tenth Edition (2000) authoritative enough? Whatever might anyone find lacking as a definitive answer here other than, say, p. 388?And if you really need three people to tell your members the same thing, why won't Mr Goldsworthy, Mr Foulkes, and Alan H. do?[Edited to satisfy OCD requirements]Thanks for the prompt response.If you look in the begining of this thread on May 23, 2011, it says the Absentations should be counted. On the Page 388 lines 10 to 14 Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, Tenth Edition (2000) provides the examples and mentions "Votes are cast" it is not clear about abstentations. (Should I infer from that page that the absentations to be ignored. There is no mention of "Present & Voting") If the absentations are not to be counted then the comment in the begining of this thread On May 23, 2011 about absentations by H. Wm. Mountcastle contradicts the Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, Tenth Edition.Also I am not clear about Mr. Alan's response. (It does not say if the amendment passed, but comments on 2/3 majority.)I also infer from your comments that "A" is correct and the amendment passed.Thanks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted June 12, 2011 at 02:51 PM Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 at 02:51 PM On the Page 388 lines 10 to 14 Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, Tenth Edition (2000) provides the examples and mentions "Votes are cast" it is not clear about abstentations. (Should I infer from that page that the absentations to be ignored. There is no mention of "Present & Voting") No need to "infer" anything. Look at lines 3-6 on page 388 (particularly the words "excluding blanks or abstentions". This means exactly what it says.An abstention is not a vote cast. Take a look at FAQ #6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M Yusuf Bora Posted June 12, 2011 at 03:18 PM Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 at 03:18 PM No need to "infer" anything. Look at lines 3-6 on page 388 (particularly the words "excluding blanks or abstentions". This means exactly what it says.An abstention is not a vote cast. Take a look at FAQ #6.Thanks Mr. Dan.I am clear now. Thanks for everyone's help. I can advise the secretary of the organization about the amendment.RegardsM Yusuf Bora Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted June 12, 2011 at 03:21 PM Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 at 03:21 PM On the Page 388 lines 10 to 14 Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, Tenth Edition (2000) provides the examples and mentions "Votes are cast" it is not clear about abstentations. (Should I infer from that page that the absentations to be ignored. There is no mention of "Present & Voting") Well, if it is unclear, FAQ #6 should clear this up nicely for you. Abstentions cannot possibly be considered votes cast, since they are not votes.If the absentations are not to be counted then the comment in the begining of this thread On May 23, 2011 about absentations by H. Wm. Mountcastle contradicts the Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, Tenth Edition.No, the original poster was asking a different question - whether members may "partially abstain" when there are multiple questions on the same ballot, and this is what Mr. Mountcastle said "Yep" to. This is the main reason we advise posters to post new questions as new topics - to avoid misunderstandings like this.I also infer from your comments that "A" is correct and the amendment passed.Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted June 13, 2011 at 12:04 AM Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 at 12:04 AM Sorry but I do not see any conflict a 2/3 vote and a 2/3 majority vote mean the same thing In common usage, that may be true.In RONR, a majority means a majority, a 2/3 vote means a 2/3 vote, and a "2/3 majority" does not exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.