Bylaws Versus Robert's Rules

[Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle]

See pp.561-562.

And stop mixing voting requirements with quorum requirements."

[Guest Jim]

The Bylaws say that a quorum is the minimum required number of Members necessary to cast a majority of all the votes who must be present either in person or by proxy.

It's the Bylaws that are mixing the voting requirements and the quorum require"

[Guest E A Lemoine]

>>However, I don't see anything wrong with that.<<

Under RONR, if a vote was 1-0, it passed unanimously. By combining the two methods (voting requirements with quorum requirements), the outcome of the vote is dependent on the number "

[Guest Trina]

> So obviously the purpose of the quorum is to legitimize the voting, not to legitimize anything else.

So I don't know why you keep trying to divorce the two things. <

If your bylaws specifically say you may do X, Y, and Z at a non"

[Guest Dan Honemann]

>>Is there a Section in Robert's Rules that specifically establishes that an Association's Bylaws supercede Robert's Rules...<<

Yes, Section 2."

[David A Foulkes]

<<So the only thing that actually requires the quorum is the voting. >>

<<So obviously the purpose of the quorum is to legitimize the voting, not to legitimize anything else.>>

How about reading and approval of mi"

[Guest Chris H]

Also previous notice can't be given at a meeting without a quorum."

[Guest Jim]

Page 337 in the 10th edition states that without a quorum, a meeting is still officialy held in compliance with any requirement to have the meeting, but no decisions can be made, other than covening or recessing or seeking a quorum or adjourning. Without "

[Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle]

>>There can be no legitimate approval of an action with less than a majority of a quorum.<<

That's simply false.

In other words, you're wrong. You were wrong yesterday. You were wrong the day before. And I suspect you'll be w"

[Guest Jim]

A motion and a second and a debate and a vote are the various stages of a voting process. The first three parts are done in anticipation of the fourth part. So isn't that what the quorum is for? Is a vote necessary for an approval of minutes? Why would a "

[David A Foulkes]

<<There is nothing in Robert's Rules that either states or implies that the number can be lower than that minimum required number. >>

RONR (10 ed. p. 387 ll. 8-13): "when the term majority vote is used with qualification - as in the c"

[Guest Jim]

OK.

By the way, thanks for your help yesterday. It was very useful to me.

We just happen to disagree on this one thing. That's all. "

[Guest Jim]

On page 389, it talks about "the set of members to which the proportion [the approval threshold] applies," whether it be the number "present and voting" or "present" or "total Membership" or "other." This "

[Guest Jim]

Isn't that a decision? Does it require a vote? "

[Guest Jim]

Thanks."

[Guest Kim Goldsworthy]

Jim,

>>It never says anything about the minimum required number of approving votes being allowed to be less than a majority of the quorum number (10), that is, less than 6. If this was something that was allowed, certainly Robert's Rules would t"

[Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle]

Jim vs. our own Mr. Goldsworthy.

Truly a match made in heaven."

[Guest Jim]

I didn't say that an approval vote is calculated by multiplying the approval threshold times the quorum number. I said that the (absolute) minimum required number of approval votes is the approval threshold times the quorum number. That is the absolutely "

[David A Foulkes]

Jim, let's move on, shall we?"

[Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle]

>>shall we?<<

Do you mean "must we?"

I'd like to hear what Mr. Goldsworthy has to say."

[David A Foulkes]

<<I'd like to hear what Mr. Goldsworthy has to say.>>

Well, he has weighed in once already, with a very compelling argument. You want more? He's likely to get all ad hominem on our friend Jim."

[Guest Gary c Tesser]

Jim.

1. No one on this forum has read your bylaws except you ... but you said, "It's the Bylaws that are mixing the voting requirements and the quorum requirements."

Mr Mountastle warned you not to mix them. But apparently y"

[Guest Gary c Tesser]

2. The misleading stuff about one-quarter of the membership does not appear in RONR. That discussion serves only to illustrate an abstract principle; it in no way affects the way members vote, or abstain, in practice.

Disregard it. Or, note th"

[Guest Gary c Tesser]

3. Regrettably, the example RONR used on p. 389 - 90 showed the Aye votes to exceed the quorum number, allowing Jim to draw his erroneous conclusion. And regrettably, the example on p. 387 does not mention the quorum number, since, if the writers had pi"

[Guest Dan Honemann]

I don't think it regrettable at all.

The rules as stated, both in RONR and in ROR, are completely clear in this regard."