Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

E-mail voting [ted flanders]


Guest Guest

Recommended Posts

Not unless it is permitted by your bylaws or required by state law.  Otherwise, RONR prohibits it.

 

From page 423 of RONR:  "ABSENTEE VOTING. It is a 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, although it should be noted that a member need not be present when the question is put. Exceptions to this rule must be expressly stated in the bylaws. Such possible exceptions include: (a) voting by postal mail, e-mail, or fax, and ( b ) proxy voting."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes our HOA has emergencies that cannot wait for a Board meeting . . . 

 

The board members (but not the board) can act on their own, informally, with the hope that their action will be ratified (i.e. officially approved) at the next board meeting. See p.348

 

If the roof is about to collapse they should probably get it fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happens if thence mail vote is not ratified by the board

When members act illegally, such as in the absence of a quorum, with the hope that their actions will be ratified later, they are acting at their own risk.  If the action is not ratified, they can possibly be held financially responsible for any expenses or losses the organization incurs as a result of their actions.  They can also be subjected to disciplinary action.

 

Here is what RONR says about it on page 348:

 

"The prohibition against transacting business in the absence of a quorum cannot be waived even by unanimous consent, and a notice (pp. 121–24) cannot be validly given. If there is important business that should not be delayed until the next regular meeting, the assembly should fix the time for an adjourned meeting and then adjourn. If, instead, the members present take action informally in the absence of a quorum, they do so at their own risk. Although the assembly can later ratify their action (pp. 124–25), it is under no obligation to do so."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When members act illegally, such as in the absence of a quorum, with the hope that their actions will be ratified later, they are acting at their own risk.  If the action is not ratified, they can possibly be held financially responsible for any expenses or losses the organization incurs as a result of their actions.  They can also be subjected to disciplinary action.

 

Here is what RONR says about it on page 348:

 

"The prohibition against transacting business in the absence of a quorum cannot be waived even by unanimous consent, and a notice (pp. 121–24) cannot be validly given. If there is important business that should not be delayed until the next regular meeting, the assembly should fix the time for an adjourned meeting and then adjourn. If, instead, the members present take action informally in the absence of a quorum, they do so at their own risk. Although the assembly can later ratify their action (pp. 124–25), it is under no obligation to do so."

 

Wait, didn't they transact business in the absence of a meeting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...