absent or non votes

[Guest shrubber]

Here goes,

We have 265 members, we vote every year on a budget, and each member is required to pay their equal amount if the budget passes.

We allow for absentee ballots ( I know, bad idea )

Our bylaws state that

' a meeting of the general membership shalll be called for the purpose of approving the proposed budget ....'

'at the annual budget meeting ... a member may vote by absentee ballot. They shall prorate to each member his fair share of...'

We recieved 121 ballots and or voting members at the meeting.

We had 82 Yays

and 13 Nays.

( note, less than 121, along with the total membership, is where the abstention question comes into play )

Did the vote pass? Why or why not?

Our bylaws are silent as to the required percentage required to pass. Is a budget, done every year, akin to ' Amending something previously adopted', and requiring 2/3, or akin to just a regular vote, and requiring a majority?

[David A Foulkes]

Here goes,

We have 265 members, we vote every year on a budget, and each member is required to pay their equal amount if the budget passes.

We allow for absentee ballots ( I know, bad idea )

Our bylaws state that

' a meeting of the general membership shalll be called for the purpose of approving the proposed budget ....'

'at the annual budget meeting ... a member may vote by absentee ballot. They shall prorate to each member his fair share of...'

We recieved 121 ballots and or voting members at the meeting.

We had 82 Yays

and 13 Nays.

( note, less than 121, along with the total membership, is where the abstention question comes into play )

Did the vote pass? Why or why not?

Our bylaws are silent as to the required percentage required to pass. Is a budget, done every year, akin to ' Amending something previously adopted', and requiring 2/3, or akin to just a regular vote, and requiring a majority?

Do you think the vote (82 to 13) is less than a majority? or even 2/3?

[Josh Martin]

We recieved 121 ballots and or voting members at the meeting.

We had 82 Yays

and 13 Nays.

( note, less than 121, along with the total membership, is where the abstention question comes into play )

Did the vote pass? Why or why not?

Our bylaws are silent as to the required percentage required to pass. Is a budget, done every year, akin to ' Amending something previously adopted', and requiring 2/3, or akin to just a regular vote, and requiring a majority?

Since it is understood that a new budget is adopted every year, I would not consider it to be a case of ASPA. It appears to be an ordinary main motion, so a majority of the ballots cast (excluding blanks or abstentions) is sufficient for adoption. (RONR, 10th ed., pg. 387, lines 5-13; FAQ #6) The motion should have been declared adopted.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Did the vote pass? Why or why not?

Our bylaws are silent as to the required percentage required to pass.

Is a budget, done every year, akin to ' Amending something previously adopted', and requiring 2/3, or akin to just a regular vote, and requiring a majority?

Review:

82 affirmative + 13 negative = 95 total votes cast.

(It appears that some members who were present did not cast a vote: 121 - 95 = 26 abstentions.)

Thus, you base number for calculation of "majority vote" is 95.

Number of votes necessary for adoption: anything greater than 47.5.

(Since people don't come in fractional sizes, earthlings on this planet are counted in integers, and thus 48 votes of 95 will be necessary for adoption. When "Brave New World" incubators are implemented by the government (in "1984" by "Big Brother"?), then we'll talk about "three-fifths of a person" or some such new scientific calculation. Paging Dr. B. Franklin, your anti-slave caucus is calling.)

You got 82 of 95.

And 82 satisfies a majority vote for 95 votes cast.

Answer: It passes.

Re "... amend something previously adopted ...":

Budgets are adopted new every year. No treasurer is bound by (say) 1984's budget. It is ALWAYS the CURRENT budget which is binding. Last year's budget is of no authority.

So there is no parliamentary necessity for "Amend Something Previously Adopted".

It is the Frank Sinatra rule: "All, or Nothing at All."