Financial Assessments on members

[Guest GuestArtist21]

My question relates to financial assessments on our membership at meetings in which a quorum exists.  From time to time we call meetings, announced in advance as required by the bylaws, in which to discuss sending financial assistance to other organizations in need.  This assistance is typically a lump sum of money, perhaps a few thousand dollars.  From time to time, this assistance may require an additional assessment of the membership above and beyond our annual membership dues; the resulting vote, typically done by hand in the meeting, includes the provision that each member shall contribute a given amount.  

Our quorum number is fairly low for our membership (about 25%); thus at these meetings we almost always have a quorum, during which we debate and routinely pass these assessments.  As of late, members who were not at the meeting have begun to refuse being assessed.  Is it clear that financial business debated and voted upon by the membership is binding on all members, regardless of their attendance at the meeting?

[Weldon Merritt]

On 2/1/2022 at 6:48 PM, Guest GuestArtist21 said:

 Is it clear that financial business debated and voted upon by the membership is binding on all members, regardless of their attendance at the meeting?

Do the bylaws authorizes these "additional assessment[s] of the membership"? If so, then yes, they are binding on the members, whether are not they were in attendance. But if not (which I suspect is the case), then they cannot be imposed. RONR (12th ed.) 56:19. 

[Josh Martin]

On 2/1/2022 at 7:48 PM, Guest GuestArtist21 said:

My question relates to financial assessments on our membership at meetings in which a quorum exists.  From time to time we call meetings, announced in advance as required by the bylaws, in which to discuss sending financial assistance to other organizations in need.  This assistance is typically a lump sum of money, perhaps a few thousand dollars.  From time to time, this assistance may require an additional assessment of the membership above and beyond our annual membership dues; the resulting vote, typically done by hand in the meeting, includes the provision that each member shall contribute a given amount.  

Our quorum number is fairly low for our membership (about 25%); thus at these meetings we almost always have a quorum, during which we debate and routinely pass these assessments.  As of late, members who were not at the meeting have begun to refuse being assessed.  Is it clear that financial business debated and voted upon by the membership is binding on all members, regardless of their attendance at the meeting?

I concur with Mr. Merritt that additional assessments beyond dues cannot be imposed upon members unless the bylaws so provide.

"Members cannot be assessed any additional payment aside from their dues unless it is provided for in the bylaws." RONR (12th ed.) 56:19

In the event the bylaws do contain a provision authorizing additional assessments, then yes, those assessments are binding on all members, regardless of their attendance at the meeting.

"If any members are absent—as is usually the case in any formally organized assembly such as a legislative body or the assembly of an ordinary society—the members present at a regular or properly called meeting act for the entire membership, subject only to such limitations as may be established by the body’s governing rules (see Quorum of Members, however, 3:3–5; also 40)." RONR (12th ed.) 1:1

If the bylaws contain provisions for assessments but the organization is concerned that the process provides insufficient protection for absentees, then the society could amend the bylaws to increase the vote required to adopt such assessments, require previous notice for assessments, or such other modifications. If the bylaws do not contain provisions for assessments, then the society may not impose assessments unless and until the bylaws are amended to include provisions regarding them, and the society may wish to give thought to the process for imposing assessments.

Finally, I would dispute that a quorum of 25% is "fairly low" for a meeting of the society's membership. Such a quorum is not at all unusual for a meeting of the society's membership, although certainly the society may amend its bylaws to adjust the quorum if it wishes.

[GuestArtist21]

Thank you very much for these replies—they are much appreciated and provide a good deal of clarity on the topic.  Our bylaws do not specifically allow for additional assessments; we will review whether this would be prudent for us to do.  

[Richard Brown]

Agreeing with Mr. Martin, I would be cautious about raising your quorum requirement.  Unless this is a small local organization at which most members show up for amost all meetings, setting a quorum  requirement that is too high can cause  you serious problems if members lose interest and stop  showing up for meetings or if the organization grows to the point where it is impractical for most members to show up for meetings.  I agree with Mr. Martin that a quorum requirement of 25 percent of the membership for most organizations does not seem low at all.  You said you usually do have a quorum.  Well, you SHOULD normally have a quorum present except in the most unusual of circumstances.  Too high a quorum requirement  causes serious problems.