Majority of those present vs. Majority of members

[Guest A Murdaugh]

Newly appointed parliamentarian here.  While familiarizing myself with our Bylaws, I came across this wording in our Amendment Procedure section that strikes me as problematic.

"These bylaws, or any provisions thereof, may be abrogated or amended at any meeting of the Faculty of the College of Liberal Arts by vote of two-thirds of those present, assuming a quorum..." (Goes on to describe the timeline)

I'm concerned about the phrase "those present".  Voting membership is restricted to the faculty in a different section, but our meetings are open to all employees and students of the college.  Does this wording mean we have to have a 2/3 majority of everyone present, regardless of their voting status?

[Dan Honemann]

On 8/31/2022 at 9:47 AM, Guest A Murdaugh said:

Newly appointed parliamentarian here.  While familiarizing myself with our Bylaws, I came across this wording in our Amendment Procedure section that strikes me as problematic.

"These bylaws, or any provisions thereof, may be abrogated or amended at any meeting of the Faculty of the College of Liberal Arts by vote of two-thirds of those present, assuming a quorum..." (Goes on to describe the timeline)

I'm concerned about the phrase "those present".  Voting membership is restricted to the faculty in a different section, but our meetings are open to all employees and students of the college.  Does this wording mean we have to have a 2/3 majority of everyone present, regardless of their voting status?

This wording does leave a little something to be desired, but I think the obvious intent, and hence its meaning, is that the vote required is the vote of two-thirds of the members of the faculty present at the time the vote is taken.

[puzzling]

On 8/31/2022 at 2:47 PM, Guest A Murdaugh said:

Newly appointed parliamentarian here.  While familiarizing myself with our Bylaws, I came across this wording in our Amendment Procedure section that strikes me as problematic.

"These bylaws, or any provisions thereof, may be abrogated or amended at any meeting of the Faculty of the College of Liberal Arts by vote of two-thirds of those present, assuming a quorum..." (Goes on to describe the timeline)

I'm concerned about the phrase "those present".  Voting membership is restricted to the faculty in a different section, but our meetings are open to all employees and students of the college.  Does this wording mean we have to have a 2/3 majority of everyone present, regardless of their voting status?

how is the quorum defined?

but also i (and many others) always agree with Dan Honemann

be aware that abstentions do count so if there are 30 members present, 25 voted, 19 in favour, 6 against the amendment failed. (you need 2/3 of the members present = 20 votes in favour)

 

[Richard Brown]

On 8/31/2022 at 11:39 AM, puzzling said:

be aware that abstentions do count so if there are 30 members present, 25 voted, 19 in favour, 6 against the amendment failed. (you need 2/3 of the members present = 20 votes in favour)

Perhaps this is nitpicking, but technically the abstentions do not count. They never count, although they can sometimes have the EFFECT of a no vote.  In this case, the only two things that matter (or count) are how many members are present and whether there are yes votes from two-thirds of them. 

[Shmuel Gerber]

On 8/31/2022 at 12:55 PM, Richard Brown said:

Perhaps this is nitpicking, but technically the abstentions do not count. They never count, although they can sometimes have the EFFECT of a no vote.  In this case, the only two things that matter (or count) are how many members are present and whether there are yes votes from two-thirds of them. 

So the abstentions are not counted, but the abstainers are (together with all other members present). 

[puzzling]

Reading RONR 44:9 a)  we will never know how many wanted to vote against it:

when such a vote is required however, the chair must count those present immediately after the affirmative vote is taken, before any change can take place in attendance. The negative vote is not taken, since it is intrinsically irrelevant to determining whether the motion is adopted.

---

So only an affirmative vote is taken and we will never know how many of the members present wanted to vote against.

Not sure how this should be written in the minutes.

 

 

 

Edited August 31, 2022 at 08:59 PM by puzzling
typo

[Shmuel Gerber]

On 8/31/2022 at 3:00 PM, puzzling said:

The negative vote is not taken, since it is intrinsically irrelevant to determinating whether the motion is adopted.

I am confident that the word "determinating" does not appear in RONR.

On 8/31/2022 at 3:00 PM, puzzling said:

Not sure how this should be written in the minutes.

They could say something like "After debate, the motion was adopted with 20 voting in favor, 30 members being present." 

[puzzling]

On 8/31/2022 at 8:26 PM, Shmuel Gerber said:

I am confident that the word "determinating" does not appear in RONR.

They could say something like "After debate, the motion was adopted with 20 voting in favor, 30 members being present." 

corrected

[Gary Novosielski]

On 8/31/2022 at 3:00 PM, puzzling said:

So only an affirmative vote is taken and we will never know how many of the members present wanted to vote against.

Yes.  Because of the unusual threshold, you don't know what members would have done if things were different.  And admittedly, if things were different they wouldn't be the same.  But if some members wanted to vote against the motion and the motion failed, those members got what they wanted, so what complaint could they have?