Majority vote

[Guest Tony]

Say quorum has been met to begin voting where 2/3 of the quorum is required for a motion to pass. After the votes have been tallied there is not enough yes or no votes to meet the required 2/3 vote. For example quorum is 36. Yes votes tallied are 10 while no votes tallied are 9 with the rest of the votes blank.

My question is can the vote be rescheduled to obtain a proper result or is considered defeated since enough votes did not meet the 2/3 threshold?

[David A Foulkes]

Your post is a bit confusing to me. Your subject line is "Majority vote" but you reference a 2/3 vote in your post. Also, you confuse a quorum with a voting threshold. The quorum is the minimum number of voting members that must be present at a properly called meeting in order to conduct business, including voting on motions. Motions are typically adopted by a majority vote, but there are some that require a 2/3 vote, and both are calculated of the members present and voting. So you're mixing them up a bit and it's a bit muddled.

In any event, you had 19 votes cast, of which a majority were affirmative. Abstentions do not count except in a very few instances, and it doesn't sound (yet) like this is one of those. If the motion only required a majority vote, then it passed. If it required a 2/3 vote, then it was defeated. But barring any circumstance that might create a continuing breach of the parliamentary process, the vote is over. You don't reschedule it because less than 2/3 of the quorum (36) voted.

[Tim Wynn]

Do your bylaws really say, "2/3 of the quorum?"

[tctheatc]

What an odd thing for the requirement to be "2/3 of the quorum". But assuming it is as you say and in order to answer your question, you'd need 24 votes in favor to pass the motion. So, yes, the motion is considered defeated as you've described the results. You don't just keep voting until you get a more favorable outcome. But, renewing the motion at another time is not out of the question...

[Guest Tony]

Sorry I guess this whole situation is confusing to me still kinda new at this, forgive me if I get things wrong

but basically 2/3 of members needed for quorum. And majority of quorum need to pass.

Not enough votes to get a majority for either.

So where I'm confused is what happens next. I'm being told it was defeated but how is that the case. Because if do not count the non-votes and you don't have enought to have the majority either way how is it defeated.

Technically it didn't pass or fail so would it be wrong to reschedule the vote to try to reach a majority.

[Tim Wynn]

A motion that doesn't receive enough votes for adoption is lost. A motion that is lost can br renewed at the next session. Forget this revote idea.

[tctheatc]

So where I'm confused is what happens next. I'm being told it was defeated but how is that the case. Because if do not count the non-votes and you don't have enought to have the majority either way how is it defeated.

Technically it didn't pass or fail so would it be wrong to reschedule the vote to try to reach a majority.

It absolutely DID fail. It failed to get the required number of votes to pass. It's is lost, defeated, failed, kaput. Bring it up again at the next session if you want, but that sucka right now is a failed motion.

[Guest Tony]

Dont mean to keep beating this dead horse. But I guess can some one explain the logic in this.

We are told that non votes should not be counted. So if all we can count are yes's and no's and there isn't enough to difinantly say one is the majority how does one consider it failed. If we consider it failed, to me at least, it means we are counting the non votes as no, I mean you can really say if you plan on voting no then don't vote at all since if we can't get enough yes's then it's defeated non the less.

Also, if we bring it up again during the next section is that considered a re-vote if not what is it considered. And just to clarify I at this point don't really care if it passes or not I just want a clear cut decision either the majority is for this or not, I don't see how a technicality is fair. But maybe I'm missing something, again if someone can explain why then maybe I can move on.

[Tim Wynn]

You May be the victim of poorly written bylaws. Majority vote according to RONR is as the following example:

100 members

20 members present

3 affirmative votes

2 against

Motion is adopted (more yes votes than no votes)

On the other hand, if your bylaws dictate that a specific number of yes votes must be reached, then abstentions have the same effect as a negative vote.

[David A Foulkes]

So if all we can count are yes's and no's and there isn't enough to difinantly say one is the majority how does one consider it failed.

The problem you're having, in my opinion, is that you are thinking that as there is a voting threshold to meet in order to adopt a motion (in your case, a majority of a quorum), that same threshold must be met in reverse to defeat the motion. This is not the case. Barring any weird bylaw requirement, it's all about getting enough votes to adopt the motion.

In the case of the "standard" majority vote (as per RONR) this means more yes votes than no votes. Of 19 votes cast, with 10 yes and 9 no, the motion is adopted. Reverse those numbers and the motion is defeated. Sure, you have a majority (more of one than the other) in both cases. BUT - if there has been only 18 votes cast, 9 yes and 9 no, the motion is still defeated, because the only threshold deals with if there are enough votes to pass (more yes than no), and this is not the case in a tie. So, a tie defeats the motion, even though there are not a majority of no votes.

In the case of the "standard" 2/3 vote (as per RONR) this means at least twice as many yes votes as no votes. Keep it simple. 30 votes cast, 20 yes and 10 no, the motion is adopted (20 is at least twice as much as 10). BUT --- if there were only 19 yes votes, 10 no votes, and 1 abstention (a non-vote), then the motion fails, even though there are not 2/3 of no votes!!! If there aren't enough votes to adopt the motion, then the motion fails.

You don't need a majority of a quorum of no votes to defeat your motion, you just need to fail to achieve a majority of a quorum of yes votes. Just ask yourself "Did it get enough votes to pass?" If the answer is no, then it was defeated. Pure and simple. No middle-ground limbo re-vote stuff.

[Sean Hunt]

Just so we're clear, if your organization has 54 members, then quorum is 36, and so 19 votes are required to adopt a motion, even if they all show up?

[Josh Martin]

Also, if we bring it up again during the next section is that considered a re-vote if not what is it considered.

"Renewal" is the technical term. The motion is made again as if it had never been made, and you go through the whole process again. This is an option, since the motion was defeated.

And just to clarify I at this point don't really care if it passes or not I just want a clear cut decision either the majority is for this or not, I don't see how a technicality is fair. But maybe I'm missing something, again if someone can explain why then maybe I can move on.

If your Bylaws state that a "majority of the quorum" (or something of that nature) is required for a motion to be adopted, I haven't the foggiest idea what that is supposed to mean and it will be up to your organization to interpret its own Bylaws (see RONR, 10th ed., pgs. 570-573). The literal interpretation makes very little sense, as it would suggest that if enough members were present, a motion could be adopted even if there were more votes in the negative than in the affirmative.

In the usual case, a motion is adopted if there are more votes in the affirmative than in the negative, and if that threshold is not reached, the motion is defeated. Abstentions have no effect whatsoever. Your assembly will need to determine how your customized rule affects this.

Nonetheless, you can rest assured that this motion was defeated and it is time for everyone to move on. The declaration of the chair stands, and it's too late for anyone to raise a Point of Order about it now.

Just so we're clear, if your organization has 54 members, then quorum is 36, and so 19 votes are required to adopt a motion, even if they all show up?

I think Tony is as confused on that point as we are. Unfortunately, we can't help him. His organization will have to untangle the mess they created in their Bylaws.

[Josh Martin]

See TSC (4th Ed.), page 133ff (I think).

Mr. Foulkes, did you not get the hint the first time The Wrathful One deleted your reference to The Standard Code?

What TSC says on this subject (on whatever page) is beyond the scope of RONR and this forum. Additionally, while it may be considered persuasive, it is not dispositive for an assembly which has adopted RONR as its parliamentary authority.

[Dan Honemann]

Mr. Foulkes, did you not get the hint the first time The Wrathful One deleted your reference to The Standard Code?

What TSC says on this subject (on whatever page) is beyond the scope of RONR and this forum. Additionally, while it may be considered persuasive, it is not dispositive for an assembly which has adopted RONR as its parliamentary authority.

Yes, what TSC says on this subject is about as irrelevant and misleading as anything can get, since only an organization which has adopted TSC as its parliamentary authority should pay any attention at all to what it says about this (and maybe not even then).

[Tim Wynn]

Yes, what TSC says on this subject is about as irrelevant and misleading as anything can get, since only an organization which has adopted TSC as its parliamentary authority should pay any attention at all to what it says about this (and maybe not even then).

When I reference TSC, it's to point out why RONR should be adopted, instead... and, of course, that's no joke.

[Guest Bob W]

I'm not all that knowledgeable regarding rules or order and I confess that the Robert's Rules of Order book that I have is the 1893 version but it sounds to me that since quorum (2/3 of 36=24) was never reached that it's like the vote never happened. I would guess that you can keep trying to vote again and hope you get quorum. I suppose also that people have to vote again; you can't just keep accumulating votes.

Being a Board Member on a Homeowners Association (HOA) I would compare this issue to an HOA's issue with electing new Board Members. All 7 Board Members in my HOA (332 Homes) are elected at the Annual Meeting which is scheduled per the ByLaws in March of every year. If a 50% quorum is not achieved on the first scheduled meeting (which we've never reached in any Annual Meeting), then per the ByLaws the meeting is adjourned and the quorum is reduced to a 25% threshhold. I think that these ByLaws are typical for many HOA's. Perhaps there's something in your Bylaws which speak to what happens next when quorum is not reached for a meeting. We've never not reached the 25% quorum threshold for our Annual Meeting on the second try but only because in most years someone goes and knocks on doors to get the 10-15 votes needed to get past the 25% threshold. I think that that too is typical in many HOA's. I suppose if we didn't get the quorum on the second try that the sitting Board Members would continue to hold their positions and we could give up trying to keep getting quorum for an Annual Meeting but that probably wouldn't be too popular with the Homeowners especially the 20% who did vote without having someone knock on their door to get their vote.

[Guest Bob W]

Just reread the initial post. Looks like quorum for the meeting was achieved ("quorum has been met to begin voting"). So I would correct myself that there was quorum for a meeting. I would think that the vote could be rescheduled even though it was defeated.