Voting extended past special meeting

[Lou Rago]

Our HOA held a special meeting to vote on a special assessment to install a security gate into our private neighborhood.  Our bylaws require a 2/3 assent vote to pass.  A couple questions.  One person in attendance thought they had voted by proxy, but had not, is accepting their ballet after the meeting valid?  Then there was a motion made, second and passed that extended the voting through the end of the week to contact the homeowners that had not voted at all.  Is this a action by the homeowner's valid, to extend the voting?  Of course, this is all because the yes votes where .50 votes from passing. 

Thank you for your help.

[Joshua Katz]

The answer to this is going to depend on your organizations rules for proxy voting.  RONR does not allow proxies unless your rules (or an applicable law) do.

[J. J.]

2 hours ago, Lou Rago said:

Our HOA held a special meeting to vote on a special assessment to install a security gate into our private neighborhood.  Our bylaws require a 2/3 assent vote to pass.  A couple questions.  One person in attendance thought they had voted by proxy, but had not, is accepting their ballet after the meeting valid?  Then there was a motion made, second and passed that extended the voting through the end of the week to contact the homeowners that had not voted at all.  Is this a action by the homeowner's valid, to extend the voting?  Of course, this is all because the yes votes where .50 votes from passing. 

Thank you for your help.

Yes, a polling time and place can be set by motion.  The result, unless your bylaws say otherwise, must be announced a meeting of the HOA; it may be necessary to hold another special meeting.   

The member who didn't vote at the meeting because he thought that he had given a proxy (but didn't) may vote at any time that the polls are open. 

[Lou Rago]

Thank you.

[Lou Rago]

Please help with this question as well.  Our bylaws state that " any special assessment shall have the assent of 2/3rd's of the votes of the Members who are voting in person or by proxy at a meeting duly called for this purpose".  This is how the vote fell:  12 yes votes, 7 no votes.  total number of votes was 19.  19 times  2/3 rd's (.66% ) equals 12.54.  Our yes votes were 12, did the vote pass or not?  Are there any rules on fractional numbers while voting?

Please help.

 

Thank you.

Lou Ann

[George Mervosh]

4 minutes ago, Lou Rago said:

Please help with this question as well.  Our bylaws state that " any special assessment shall have the assent of 2/3rd's of the votes of the Members who are voting in person or by proxy at a meeting duly called for this purpose".  This is how the vote fell:  12 yes votes, 7 no votes.  total number of votes was 19.  19 times  2/3 rd's (.66% ) equals 12.54.  Our yes votes were 12, did the vote pass or not?  Are there any rules on fractional numbers while voting?

12-7 is not sufficient for a 2/3 vote requirement.  See http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#5

Edited April 25, 2018 at 08:41 PM by George Mervosh

[Lou Rago]

Thank you.

[Richard Brown]

Although RONR permits voting to be extended beyond the end of the meeting, I'm not at all sure that is appropriate in this particular case. There are two reasons.

First, as I understand the facts, the voting had already taken place, the polls had closed, the votes had been counted and the motion had failed to pass. Some one or more members, being unhappy with the results, then wanted to extend the voting to try to get enough yes votes for the motion to pass. I do not believe that was proper.

Second, the bylaws require such a vote to be taken at a meeting. That causes me to wonder whether extending the voting outside of a meeting would be proper.

[Lou Rago]

I believe you are correct in this situation.  However, now there is another situation that I need help with.  There has been a question raised regarding the proxy ballets; the bylaws require that a the proxy ballet include a date line  to be completed from the voter, along with name, address and signature.  All ballets, both proxy and meeting ballets did not provide a date line for voter.  In addition, the proxy ballets should have been turn into the Secretary, and they were not.  Does that mean the entire vote (all voters)  be disqualified due to the proxy ballets and regular that are invalid?   How would this type situation be handled?  Would the proxy ballets be voted invalid by the Board of Directors, through a motion from the Secretary, second and a vote?  Does this situation need to go before the members with a motion, second and vote?  This was a special meeting for the sole purposes of voting on a security gate, and all associated expenses.  Next, can we set-up a polling date and time for this is we need to vote again?  Or, do we have to have a full blown second special meeting ?  We appreciate any help we can get on this issue.  What a mess we have right now.

[Josh Martin]

3 hours ago, Lou Rago said:

I believe you are correct in this situation.  However, now there is another situation that I need help with.  There has been a question raised regarding the proxy ballets; the bylaws require that a the proxy ballet include a date line  to be completed from the voter, along with name, address and signature.  All ballets, both proxy and meeting ballets did not provide a date line for voter.  In addition, the proxy ballets should have been turn into the Secretary, and they were not.  Does that mean the entire vote (all voters)  be disqualified due to the proxy ballets and regular that are invalid?   How would this type situation be handled?  Would the proxy ballets be voted invalid by the Board of Directors, through a motion from the Secretary, second and a vote?  Does this situation need to go before the members with a motion, second and vote?  This was a special meeting for the sole purposes of voting on a security gate, and all associated expenses.  Next, can we set-up a polling date and time for this is we need to vote again?  Or, do we have to have a full blown second special meeting ?  We appreciate any help we can get on this issue.  What a mess we have right now.

As I understand the facts, the motion failed anyway, so this seems to be much ado about nothing.