voteing

[Guest randy phillips]

i am a new member of a property owners assc. last month the board took a vote to amend the bylaws, this amendment would have a monetary affect on the membership at large.i have served on a school board for 9 years and was chair for 7 years and the board was trained in the use of and where governed under Roberts rules . having this past experience i call into question the method of how the POA BOD counted the votes of the total 4,000+ eligible members to vote.only 693 cast ballots according to the BOD however they did not count votes that where received by the cut off date should this not be by the postmarked date (what if i had a lazy postman ,that should not affect my ability to have my voice heard) . the by laws state that to change or amend  the bylaws requires a 2/3 majority. the BOD rejected 6 votes because they did not vote on every line item issue. when members questioned there methods the POA administrator  not the BOD issued a letter stating that abstention votes are counted as non votes. so they kicked out those votes recalculated the votes so the amendment would pass. as i understand Roberts rules if the by laws specifically state a 2/3 majority then all abstention votes are counted as no votes. also the BOD requires the POA members to sign and identify themselves on the ballot or they will not accept them. am i wrong in assuming that this is out of the ordinary. or can the BOD select with ballots to use and which ones to ignore.  it seems to me that if i knew who voted and which way they cast their vote i could potentially control all votes by intimidation of the POA members and could also not report mail in ballots from the opposition. the vote was as follows 693 ballots cast , out of these ballots 460 voted in favor and 227 voted against for a total votes counted of 687 they say 5 did not vote on the amendment and 1 did not sign their ballot.(?)  therefore they did not count. by doing this they have in my opinion rigged this vote in order for it to pass. your clarification on this matter is greatly appreciated thank you. 

 

[Hieu H. Huynh]

See FAQ #6 regarding abstentions.

[Josh Martin]

only 693 cast ballots according to the BOD however they did not count votes that where received by the cut off date should this not be by the postmarked date (what if i had a lazy postman ,that should not affect my ability to have my voice heard).

Whether the deadline is based on the date the ballots are received or the date they are postmarked is up to the society's rules.

The BOD rejected 6 votes because they did not vote on every line item issue. when members questioned there methods the POA administrator not the BOD issued a letter stating that abstention votes are counted as non votes.

The POA Administrator is correct that abstentions are counted as non-votes.

as i understand Roberts rules if the by laws specifically state a 2/3 majority then all abstention votes are counted as no votes.

Your understanding is mistaken. Abstentions are never counted as a vote. In certain circumstances, they may have the same effect as a no vote, but this isn't one of them.

Also the BOD requires the POA members to sign and identify themselves on the ballot or they will not accept them. am i wrong in assuming that this is out of the ordinary.

It's hard to say with the facts provided. Mail votes are sometimes intended to be secret, and sometimes they are not. If they are to be secret, then it would obviously be improper to require a signature on the ballot itself. If they are not to be secret, then requiring a signature on the ballot is fairly standard practice.

the vote was as follows 693 ballots cast , out of these ballots 460 voted in favor and 227 voted against for a total votes counted of 687 they say 5 did not vote on the amendment and 1 did not sign their ballot.(?) therefore they did not count. by doing this they have in my opinion rigged this vote in order for it to pass. your clarification on this matter is greatly appreciated thank you.

The board was absolutely correct in excluding the five ballots which had no vote on the amendment. The board's other actions (such as requiring signatures and refusing ballots which were postmarked by the deadline but were not received in time) may or may not have been proper, depending on what your rules say on this subject.

In any event, I see no basis from the facts provided for the accusation that the board "rigged" the vote. Some of the board's decisions may or may not have been correct, but I see no reason to believe that the board acted in bad faith.

[Guest randy phillips]

Im  not sure if i made this clear ;

 

the by-laws require at least two thirds vote 

"these By-laws may be altered, amended, repealed, consolidated and new By-laws may be adopted in whole or in part by the owners of the lots in the subdivision whenever the owners of at least two thirds of said lots so agree in writing or by action of the  Property Owners Association, Inc., at a meeting duly called for said purpose by voting of at least two-thirds of the members thereat,"  

 

this is from the roberts web site under FAQ

 

 In the usual situation, where either a majority vote or a two-thirds vote is required, abstentions have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the vote since what is required is either a majority or two thirds of the votes cast. On the other hand, if the vote required is a majority or two thirds of the members present, or a majority or two thirds of the entire membership, an abstention will have the same effect as a "no" vote. Even in such a case, HOWEVER , an abstention is not a vote and is not counted as a vote . [RONR (11th ed.), p. 400, ll. 7-12; p. 401, ll. 8-11; p. 403, ll. 13-24; see also p. 66 of RONRIB.]

 

​this is the answer from another resource 

 

Question; can an abstention vote affect the result of a vote 

answer; yes when the vote is qualified in some way, such as when a majority of those present or a majority of the entire membership is required is determined by "those Present," and 20 people , a majority is 11 if 10 vote in the affirmative, 9 vote negative, and 1 person abstains, the motion is lost because it takes 11 voting in the affirmative to adopt the motion. in this case the abstention helps those voting no

 

 

would you count only  the votes aye or nay, not count the abstentions, remove the abstention voters from the head count of members present and then use those numbers of people voting aye or nay  to calculate the vote ?

[Edgar Guest]

would you count only  the votes aye or nay, not count the abstentions, remove the abstention voters from the head count of members present and then use those numbers of people voting aye or nay  to calculate the vote ?

 

If a motion requires the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the (entire) membership you count the affirmative votes and determine whether they constitute two thirds of the (entire) membership. There's no need to count anything else.

 

If there are 4,000 members you'd need at least 2,667 affirmative votes.

 

Note that this is not the same as a two-thirds vote. A vote of 1-0 would constitute a two-thirds vote no matter how many members there are.

[Guest randy phillips]

the bylaws state 2/3 of members present

[Edgar Guest]

the bylaws state 2/3 of members present

 

Then you count the number of affirmative ("yes") votes (by the members present) and determine whether that number constitutes two-thirds of the members present. There's no need to count anything else.

 

But if mail-in (i.e. absentee) ballots are accepted I'm not sure why (how?) the number of members present matters.

[Guest randy phillips]

under FAQ #6 posted above

 In the usual situation, where either a majority vote or a two-thirds vote is required, abstentions have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the vote since what is required is either a majority or two thirds of the votes cast. On the other hand, if the vote required is a majority or two thirds of the members present, or a majority or two thirds of the entire membership, an abstention will have the same effect as a “no” vote. Even in such a case, however, an abstention is not a vote and is not counted as a vote. [RONR (11th ed.), p. 400, ll. 7-12; p. 401, ll. 8-11; p. 403, ll. 13-24; see also p. 66 of RONRIB.]

 

this is where im getting hung up,. the word' PRESENT' if 693 voting members are PRESENT and under this rule should not the members present constitute a two thirds majority or should you only counts the votes cast to determinate the majority outcome in example 693 members are present 687 vote on the amendment with 5 abstentions and 1 declared ineligible    now having said that do you use the calculation of 687 members times .6667  which would require 459 affirmative votes to pass or would you use the total members present 693 members present times .6667 which would require 463 votes to pass as this would have two different outcomes of how the number is calculated keeping in mind the bylaws require two thirds of the members PRESENT   

 

[Edgar Guest]

this is where im getting hung up,. the word' PRESENT' if 693 voting members are PRESENT and under this rule should not the members present constitute a two thirds majority or should you only counts the votes cast to determinate the majority outcome in example 693 members are present 687 vote on the amendment with 5 abstentions and 1 declared ineligible    now having said that do you use the calculation of 687 members times .6667  which would require 459 affirmative votes to pass or would you use the total members present 693 members present times .6667 which would require 463 votes to pass as this would have two different outcomes of how the number is calculated keeping in mind the bylaws require two thirds of the members PRESENT

 

You may be conflating the number of members present with the number of members voting.

 

If 693 members are present then you'd need at least 462 affirmative votes (you divide the number of members present by three and then multiply that number by two).

 

But were 693 members actually present at a meeting?

 

You say you have 4,000+ members.

[Guest Guest]

there are 4000+ members but some live out of state as this community is  recreational in nature. some  members are not  in the state or on the propety at the time of voting  and there for the POA sends absentee ballots to all members. i suppose its the same as our military being able to vote overseas in their home town elections.

also one more question can a vote on bylaws/constitution have other voting issues on the same ballot or should the two be separate  ballots (i.e. bylaw admenment and a vote on trash pickup on the same ballot.

[Edgar Guest]

there are 4000+ members but some live out of state as this community is  recreational in nature. some  members are not  in the state or on the property at the time of voting  and there for the POA sends absentee ballots to all members.

 

You can't have it both ways. You can't base your voting requirement on the number of members present (at a meeting) and then permit absentee voting (by members who are not present at a meeting).

[Edgar Guest]

also one more question can a vote on bylaws/constitution have other voting issues on the same ballot or should the two be separate  ballots (i.e. bylaw amendment and a vote on trash pickup on the same ballot.

 

It's fine.

 

But putting two questions on the same ballot is the least of your problems.

[Guest randy phillips]

since i am one that does not live there full time i cannot comment on how many members where present at the time of the meeting all i have to go on is what was reported by the BOD chairman he first stated that the amendment failed. only to have the director of the POA send out announcement that indeed it did pass since you cannot count abstentions. there for it passed by 1 vote. using the calculation of votes cast not by number of members present. 

 

 

[Edgar Guest]

using the calculation of votes cast not by number of members present. 

 

Well, if the rule says "members present" you can't use "votes cast".

 

But I'm done here.

 

Good luck.

[Guest randy phillips]

i agree how do i as a member in good standing who cannot attend the on site vote be assured that what is reported is valid and true and also be reassured my vote is counted even if im not actually present in the flesh to cast my vote im confused on how you can send out absentee ballots and then only be required to count votes present. how do i know that all members where notified equally and if im known to be in opposition to the vote how am i to be assured that my vote counted or was

" lost" due to the fact im required to place my name on the ballot. this seems to me like third word election practices 

[Josh Martin]

i agree how do i as a member in good standing who cannot attend the on site vote be assured that what is reported is valid and true and also be reassured my vote is counted even if im not actually present in the flesh to cast my vote im confused on how you can send out absentee ballots and then only be required to count votes present. how do i know that all members where notified equally and if im known to be in opposition to the vote how am i to be assured that my vote counted or was

" lost" due to the fact im required to place my name on the ballot. this seems to me like third word election practices

Could you try to rephrase this question using only the alleged violations you actually have knowledge of, and leave out the wild speculation?

Also, could you explain to me why you're asking about the "members present" issue? No language to that effect appears in the quoted section of your bylaws.

[Richard Brown]

Also, could you explain to me why you're asking about the "members present" issue? No language to that effect appears in the quoted section of your bylaws.

 

the by-laws require at least two thirds vote 

"these By-laws may be altered, amended, repealed, consolidated and new By-laws may be adopted in whole or in part by the owners of the lots in the subdivision whenever the owners of at least two thirds of said lots so agree in writing or by action of the  Property Owners Association, Inc., at a meeting duly called for said purpose by voting of at least two-thirds of the members thereat,"  

I interpret the above provision as requiring the vote of at least two-thirds of the members present.  I interpret the word "thereat" to mean "there, at the meeting".   Perhaps it's up to Mr. Phillips' association to interpret that provision.

 

My bigger worry in all of this is whether the bylaws or some superior state law requires that absentee voting be allowed.  It looks like they might be mixing absentee ballots in with ballots cast by members at the meeting.  If so, that conflicts with the bylaw requirement that a vote of two thirds of the members present is required.... unless the society interprets that bylaw provision to mean that members who cast absentee ballots shall be considered "present".

 

I agree with Mr. Guest's response in post # 9 where he said the following:

 

 You may be conflating the number of members present with the number of members voting.

 

If 693 members are present then you'd need at least 462 affirmative votes (you divide the number of members present by three and then multiply that number by two).

Mr. Phillips divided 693 by .6667.  That won't work.  It yields the wrong result, as Mr. Phillips' answer of 463 indicates.  The correct answer is 462.  I would use either the method Mr. Guest suggested (divide 693 by 3 and then multiply the result by 2) or divide by .666666666666 using as many digits as my calculator will handle.  Rounding up to .67 or .667 or .6667, etc, does not yield the right answer.  Neither does rounding down to .66.   I'll leave it to the math majors to delve into that any deeper!

 

But, again, if absentee ballots are being counted in addition to those of the members present, all bets are off.

[Dan Honemann]

There's an "or" in that quotation from the bylaws.

[Richard Brown]

There's an "or" in that quotation from the bylaws.

I agree, but it appears that the association is following the second method, i.e., by means of a vote at a meeting rather than by the written agreement of two-thirds of the property owners, doesn't it?   I don't think the two methods can be combined.  I'm not sure of the point you are making by pointing out the "or" unless maybe just to make sure Mr. Phillips (and perhaps the rest of us) are aware that there is an alternative method of amending the bylaws.

 

Regardless, 693 votes/written consents is far short of two thirds of the 4,000 plus members that Mr. Phillips stated they have.  The only way that 693 "votes/members" could amend the bylaws would be at a meeting.

 

I do suspect that there are other relevant provisions of the bylaws that we have not been made aware of.  For example, we don't even know if 693 members would  constitute a quorum.

[Dan Honemann]

 As previously noted, If 693 members are present, 462 affirmative votes of those members who are present is the requirement under the second alternative. 

 

Written consents are irrelevant. Two-thirds of the total membership (whatever that may be) is irrelevant.