CKD Posted March 14, 2022 at 03:22 PM Report Share Posted March 14, 2022 at 03:22 PM Clarification needed. If you have a majority present, but over half present abstain from vote leaving a few voting members, can a motion be approved? In this case it has to do with a pay practice. Most members were also employees and had to abstain leaving the vote on 3 members to approve. I have not been able to find this addressed in Roberts Rules so wondered if anyone else has been in this situation and how it should be handled? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted March 14, 2022 at 03:33 PM Report Share Posted March 14, 2022 at 03:33 PM On 3/14/2022 at 11:22 AM, CKD said: Clarification needed. If you have a majority present, but over half present abstain from vote leaving a few voting members, can a motion be approved? In this case it has to do with a pay practice. Most members were also employees and had to abstain leaving the vote on 3 members to approve. I have not been able to find this addressed in Roberts Rules so wondered if anyone else has been in this situation and how it should be handled? Yes. Here is the definition of a quorum from RONR - "As indicated in 3:3, a quorum in an assembly is the number of members (see definition, 1:4) who must be present in order that business can be validly transacted. The quorum refers to the number of members present, not to the number actually voting on a particular question." RONR (12th ed.), 40:1 Also, nothing in RONR would require those members to abstain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted March 14, 2022 at 03:38 PM Report Share Posted March 14, 2022 at 03:38 PM On 3/14/2022 at 11:33 AM, George Mervosh said: Also, nothing in RONR would require those members to abstain. And nothing in RONR would even suggest that they should abstain. "No member should vote on a question in which he has a direct personal or pecuniary interest not common to other members of the organization. … "…The rule on abstaining from voting on a question of direct personal interest does not mean that a member should not vote for himself for an office or other position to which members generally are eligible, or should not vote when other members are included with him in a motion." RONR (12th ed.) 45:4–5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drake Savory Posted March 15, 2022 at 11:06 PM Report Share Posted March 15, 2022 at 11:06 PM The OP may want to look as to how Speaker of the House Reed handled the "disappearing quorum" in the House of Representatives. He distinguished between those present and those voting such as RONR does and said if you are present you count towards the quorum even if you don't vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted March 16, 2022 at 12:25 AM Report Share Posted March 16, 2022 at 12:25 AM On 3/15/2022 at 6:06 PM, Drake Savory said: The OP may want to look as to how Speaker of the House Reed handled the "disappearing quorum" in the House of Representatives. He distinguished between those present and those voting such as RONR does and said if you are present you count towards the quorum even if you don't vote. Interesting point, but RONR is quite clear that if a member is present, he counts towards the quorum regardless of whether he votes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drake Savory Posted March 16, 2022 at 11:19 PM Report Share Posted March 16, 2022 at 11:19 PM On 3/15/2022 at 6:25 PM, Richard Brown said: Interesting point, but RONR is quite clear that if a member is present, he counts towards the quorum regardless of whether he votes. That's what I and Speaker Reed both said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts