Ray Morse Posted October 26, 2010 at 09:17 PM Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 09:17 PM Our by-laws speak of "..2/3 of voting members present at any general meeting shall constitute a quorum." What argument do I use to convinceour membership that a quorum of 2/3 of those present is ilogical and that a quorum of everyone that showed up is a better quorum. How abouthow small a quorum can get using that formula before the members are uncomfortable with a few making policy for the many? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted October 26, 2010 at 09:23 PM Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 09:23 PM Our by-laws speak of "..2/3 of voting members present at any general meeting shall constitute a quorum." What argument do I use to convinceour membership that a quorum of 2/3 of those present is ilogical and that a quorum of everyone that showed up is a better quorum. How abouthow small a quorum can get using that formula before the members are uncomfortable with a few making policy for the many?Your understanding of what is a quorum is correct. The bylaw is nonsense unless the meaning of "quorum" is completely changed from its correct and common definition. Take a look at RONR (10th ed.), §40, pp. 334ff. Education is the only answer to convincing the other members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted October 26, 2010 at 09:31 PM Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 09:31 PM What argument do I use to convince our membership that a quorum of 2/3 of those present is ilogical and that a quorum of everyone that showed up is a better quorum. Try pages 334 and 335 of RONR(10th ed.). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted October 26, 2010 at 09:58 PM Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 09:58 PM What argument do I use to convince our membership that a quorum of 2/3 of those present is ilogical and that a quorum of everyone that showed up is a better quorum.There is no good argument. A quorum of everyone who shows up makes no more sense than a quorum of two-thirds of those present.In any event, your goal should not be to make the quorum as small as it can be, but as large as it can be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted October 26, 2010 at 10:20 PM Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 10:20 PM One can't help but wonder why Guest_RMorse would choose a Member name that appears to be the name of a Guest. I trust it was inadvertent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dan Posted October 26, 2010 at 10:27 PM Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 10:27 PM Your organization will need to decide what makes sense as a quorum for your organization.However, I am looking at your citation"..2/3 of voting members present at any general meeting shall constitute a quorum "and this may not be the complete nonsense alleged. It depends on where you pause and/or where a comma may be missing, etc.If you read this " 2/3 of [imply ALL VOTING MEMBERS OF THE ORGANIZATION] voting members [PAUSE, imply WHO ARE] present any general meeting shall constitute a quorum." I infer that your organization may have "voting members" and some other category or categories of members. To me, it is not much of a stretch to interpret your citation to mean that if you have at least 2/3 of all the voting members of the organizationat a meeting, then you have a quorum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Morse Posted October 26, 2010 at 11:03 PM Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 11:03 PM Your organization will need to decide what makes sense as a quorum for your organization.However, I am looking at your citation"..2/3 of voting members present at any general meeting shall constitute a quorum "and this may not be the complete nonsense alleged. It depends on where you pause and/or where a comma may be missing, etc.If you read this " 2/3 of [imply ALL VOTING MEMBERS OF THE ORGANIZATION] voting members [PAUSE, imply WHO ARE] present any general meeting shall constitute a quorum." I infer that your organization may have "voting members" and some other category or categories of members. To me, it is not much of a stretch to interpret your citation to mean that if you have at least 2/3 of all the voting members of the organizationat a meeting, then you have a quorum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Morse Posted October 26, 2010 at 11:08 PM Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 11:08 PM Thanks to all that replied.There isn't any puncuation in the sentence. I also intrepretted it to first mean 2/3 of the voting membership. The chair then said it wasonly about the members present. So my argument continues to be that you don't apply a fraction to those that show up but you can apply it tothe total membership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Morse Posted October 26, 2010 at 11:10 PM Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 11:10 PM One can't help but wonder why Guest_RMorse would choose a Member name that appears to be the name of a Guest. I trust it was inadvertent.My misteak. I didn't know you could post a question without first signing up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted October 26, 2010 at 11:15 PM Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 11:15 PM My misteak. I didn't know you could post a question without first signing up.It's not a big deal. Though you might want to change your "Display Name". Not that there aren't times a Member might want to disguise himself as a Guest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted October 28, 2010 at 01:20 AM Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 at 01:20 AM My misteak. It's what's for dinner! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dan Posted October 28, 2010 at 01:49 AM Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 at 01:49 AM Thanks to all that replied.There isn't any puncuation in the sentence. I also intrepretted it to first mean 2/3 of the voting membership. The chair then said it wasonly about the members present. So my argument continues to be that you don't apply a fraction to those that show up but you can apply it tothe total membership.If there are two possible interpretations of the sentence, and one is clearly nonsense (applying a fractional quorum requirement to those who show up), then it seems to me that the one that is no nonsense is the correct one. The interpretation as 2/3 of all of the voting members constitutes a quorum is a reasonable requirement for a quorum for many organizations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.