Quorum

[Guest KdQ]

Our small tennis club has about 100 members. Our bylaws state a quorum is 50% of the membership. We almost never have a quorum at meetings, even the meetings where we elect our officers. Some members believe we can get ourselves in trouble by not having a quorum at the meetings where we elect officers, because the election is not "official" without a quorum.

My question, can we have one quorum (say 10% of members) for routine things like elections of officers, and a separate quorum (say the existing 50%) for major financial matters, such as building new tennis courts, adding lights, etc. I guess we would need to define what constitutes a "major financial matter". Assuming we could, would RONR allow for different quorums for different types of votes.

Thank you.

[jstackpo]

RONR would not, but Your Bylaws can set up any arrangements that you like; your special rules would supersede RONR where they disagree.

[Tim Wynn]

Our small tennis club has about 100 members. Our bylaws state a quorum is 50% of the membership. We almost never have a quorum at meetings, even the meetings where we elect our officers. Some members believe we can get ourselves in trouble by not having a quorum at the meetings where we elect officers, because the election is not "official" without a quorum.

My question, can we have one quorum (say 10% of members) for routine things like elections of officers, and a separate quorum (say the existing 50%) for major financial matters, such as building new tennis courts, adding lights, etc. I guess we would need to define what constitutes a "major financial matter". Assuming we could, would RONR allow for different quorums for different types of votes.

Thank you.

Sure, you can do this, but it will require amending your bylaws, for which you will need a quorum. You could also set different voting requirements for certain types of motions or require approval or recommendation from a certain committee.

[Guest Edgar]

Assuming we could, would RONR allow for different quorums for different types of votes.

You can pretty much have your bylaws say whatever you want them to say. But before you complicate things, you might want to simply reduce your quorum requirement for all meetings. 50% is pretty high. Do you really expect half the membership to show up at most meetings? Apparently not. So why not amend your bylaws (you'll need the current 50% quorum to do that, of course) and reduce it to say, 20%.

As for elections, you might want to consider permitting absentee voting. Or voting by proxy. Neither are endorsed by RONR and both have their problems but that doesn't mean they might not be right for your organization.

Another option is to empower your board (or create a board if you don't have one) to make decisions throughout the year. Then you'll only need to round up enough members for the annual meeting. Combine it with your awards banquet and you should have no problem getting people to show up.

In short, there's more than one way to skin a cat.

[Chris Harrison]

My question, can we have one quorum (say 10% of members) for routine things like elections of officers, and a separate quorum (say the existing 50%) for major financial matters, such as building new tennis courts, adding lights, etc.

Yes.

I guess we would need to define what constitutes a "major financial matter".

Without a question or doubt you all will want the bylaws to clearly and concretely define "major financial matters." Otherwise you will have argument after argument after argument each time there is a question (and if anyone posts here asking us for help we would tell you that it is up to you all to interpret those pesky bylaws ). Better to get right the first time.

Assuming we could, would RONR allow for different quorums for different types of votes.

Your bylaws outrank RONR so unless there are applicable higher level rules or laws prohibiting it you can pretty much have the bylaws say whatever you want.

[Tim Wynn]

We almost never have a quorum at meetings, even the meetings where we elect our officers.

Then you haven't elected officers.

Some members believe we can get ourselves in trouble by not having a quorum at the meetings where we elect officers, because the election is not "official" without a quorum.

Some members are right. I don't know why official is in quotations. There's no doubt about it: the election doesn't count for anything.

[Gary Novosielski]

As for elections, you might want to consider permitting absentee voting. Or voting by proxy. Neither are endorsed by RONR and both have their problems but that doesn't mean they might not be right for your organization.

While that's true that neither is endorsed, it's worth pointing out that absentee voting and proxy voting are quite different in the degree reproach RONR heaps upon them..

Neither of them is allowed unless a provision is included in the bylaws permitting the practice. But absentee voting is recognized as a useful and effective tool, and RONR even goes into some detail, offering examples of procedures such as the double-envelope method of mail voting, that ensure the integrity and secrecy of the process.

Proxy voting, in contrast, is denounced as a violation of the fundamental parliamentary principle of one-person-one-vote, and is expressly prohibited even in cases where statute or code would permit it in societies whose bylaws are silent on the matter. In other words, if your bylaws are otherwise silent, but adopt RONR, then they are no longer silent on proxy voting--they prohibit it.

[Guest Edgar]

While that's true that neither is endorsed, it's worth pointing out that absentee voting and proxy voting are quite different in the degree reproach RONR heaps upon them.

Yes, that's a distinction worth noting. Thanks.

[Dan Honemann]

While that's true that neither is endorsed, it's worth pointing out that absentee voting and proxy voting are quite different in the degree reproach RONR heaps upon them..

Neither of them is allowed unless a provision is included in the bylaws permitting the practice. But absentee voting is recognized as a useful and effective tool, and RONR even goes into some detail, offering examples of procedures such as the double-envelope method of mail voting, that ensure the integrity and secrecy of the process.

Proxy voting, in contrast, is denounced as a violation of the fundamental parliamentary principle of one-person-one-vote, and is expressly prohibited even in cases where statute or code would permit it in societies whose bylaws are silent on the matter. In other words, if your bylaws are otherwise silent, but adopt RONR, then they are no longer silent on proxy voting--they prohibit it.

Yes, that's a distinction worth noting. Thanks.

Although there certainly are distinctions to be drawn between proxy voting and various other forms of absentee voting, all of them violate the "fundamental principle of parliamentary law that the right to vote is limited to the members of an organization who are actually present at the time the vote is taken in a regular or properly called meeting", and "any exceptions to this rule must be expressly stated in the bylaws." (RONR, 11th ed., p. 423, ll. 17-25). As a consequence, the underlying principle embodied in the statement found on page 429, lines 10-14, with respect to proxy voting has equal applicability to all forms of absentee voting (as does the footnote on page 580).

[Rev Ed]

You will need to first get a quorum to a meeting in order to amend the By-laws to lower the quorum. Then you need to meet the voting requirement to amend the By-laws. However, you can lower the quorum to a level that would normally attend a meeting - but try not to make it too low or else it becomes pointless as there would be too few members to make it worthwhile even having a quorum.

[Gary Novosielski]

Although there certainly are distinctions to be drawn between proxy voting and various other forms of absentee voting, all of them violate the "fundamental principle of parliamentary law that the right to vote is limited to the members of an organization who are actually present at the time the vote is taken in a regular or properly called meeting", and "any exceptions to this rule must be expressly stated in the bylaws." (RONR, 11th ed., p. 423, ll. 17-25). As a consequence, the underlying principle embodied in the statement found on page 429, lines 10-14, with respect to proxy voting has equal applicability to all forms of absentee voting (as does the footnote on page 580).

If only I had my book with me, or my Kindle version had real page numbers. <sigh>

But certainly that's correct, and Edgar's statement was in line with that as well.

The main distinction in my mind is that proxy voting violates the one-person-one-vote principle in addition to the members-actually-present principle. And in my view that's at least twice as bad.

But to be clear for Guest_KdQ's benefit: as far as the Rules are concerned, both are prohibited with equal vigor, unless and until authorized in the bylaws.