Quorum

[Guest Salin]

Our Parent Council Constitution provides that "quorum shall consist of the majority of those present at the meeting".

Membership in the Council is "loosely determined", as all parents and guardians of enrolled students are members. Nevertheless, there is also a provision establishing a 9 member Executive Committee.

Should quorum not be set in relation to a minimum number of Executive Members ?

Thanks !

[hmtcastle]

Our Parent Council Constitution provides that "quorum shall consist of the majority of those present at the meeting".

That's no quorum requirement at all (since a majority of those present will always be present).

Should quorum not be set in relation to a minimum number of Executive Members ?

That's entirely up to your organization though, without a clearly defined membership list, your suggestion is not a bad idea.

[Rob Elsman]

Our Parent Council Constitution provides that "quorum shall consist of the majority of those present at the meeting".

Membership in the Council is "loosely determined", as all parents and guardians of enrolled students are members. Nevertheless, there is also a provision establishing a 9 member Executive Committee.

Should quorum not be set in relation to a minimum number of Executive Members ?

Thanks !

A quorum has nothing to do with the number of members who vote on any particular question. This has to be the misunderstanding, since "majority of those present" doesn't make any sense, otherwise.

[Tim Wynn]

Our Parent Council Constitution provides that "quorum shall consist of the majority of those present at the meeting".

Quorum is often confused with Voting Requirement. A quorum is the minimum number of members who must be present for business to be legally transacted. So, it makes no sense for it to be a fraction of those who are present.

Membership in the Council is "loosely determined", as all parents and guardians of enrolled students are members.

That doesn't sound too loose, since you have a fixed method for establishing membership. However, if you didn't already have a rule prescribing your quorum, I'd say your organization would qualify under the provision found in Robert's Rules or Order, on page 335, line 1 through 6, which deems your quorum to be "those who attend," effectively identical to your rule in its application. Yet, you do have a rule already in place, so Robert's won't apply.

Nevertheless, there is also a provision establishing a 9 member Executive Committee.

Should quorum not be set in relation to a minimum number of Executive Members ?

Thanks !

Meetings of the executive committee should have a separate quorum based on its members, yes. If you don't have such a provision in your constitution, a quorum of the executive committee would be a majority of its members.

[Guest Salin]

A quorum has nothing to do with the number of members who vote on any particular question. This has to be the misunderstanding, since "majority of those present" doesn't make any sense, otherwise.

As I understand it, "loosely organized" groups, such as church congregations or alumni associations, usually do have quorum expressed by "consisting of those who attend the meeting", in the absence of any specific provision in the governing document. RR10th page 21. But what seems at odds with this is the fact that the governing document also establishes an Executive Committee and I would have thought there ought to have been some relationship between the number of Executive Members present, and quorum, in order to validly transact business.

Appreciate your reply !

[Rob Elsman]

As I understand it, "loosely organized" groups, such as church congregations or alumni associations, usually do have quorum expressed by "consisting of those who attend the meeting", in the absence of any specific provision in the governing document. RR10th page 21. But what seems at odds with this is the fact that the governing document also establishes an Executive Committee and I would have thought there ought to have been some relationship between the number of Executive Members present, and quorum, in order to validly transact business.

Appreciate your reply !

I'm just guessing, but I think what was intended was that adoption of (main?) motions would require an affirmative vote of a majority of the members present, RONR (10th ed.), p. 390, ll. 13-24.

[hmtcastle]

I'm just guessing, but I think what was intended was that adoption of (main?) motions would require an affirmative vote of a majority of the members present, RONR (10th ed.), p. 390, ll. 13-24.

Though what was intended is irrelevant. It says "quorum" so it means "quorum".

[Tim Wynn]

Though what was intended is irrelevant. It says "quorum" so it means "quorum".

Yeah, but I'd say it's a good guess... irrelevant or not.

[Guest Salin]

Thanks to all of you ! This is the first time I have used this Forum and I very much appreciated the speed with which I received replies. Looks like we will be tweaking the Constitution at the next AGM... Salin (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada)

[Tim Wynn]

Thanks to all of you ! This is the first time I have used this Forum and I very much appreciated the speed with which I received replies. Looks like we will be tweaking the Constitution at the next AGM... Salin (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada)

Good luck. We look forward to your second time using the forum.