How many votes does this take?

First question - does delinquency remove the right to vote?

Joe

Yes

The default rule in Robert's Rules is based on the number of votes cast. However, that does NOT apply in your case.

Assuming that you do not have a provision in your CCRs etc. that takes away the vote of delinquent members, then you must base your count on the total number of members - 800. 75% of 800 is 600. However, your bylaws say "entitled to cast MORE than seventy-five percent (75%)", so, if 600 EQUALS 75%, then you need 601 votes to pass. If you want another opinion, go to www.robertsrules.com and ask your question in their Question and Answer forum.

Forget I mentioned the delinquent members. The real question is how you interpret the CC&R? Is it 75% of all members of the association or 75% of the votes cast.

RobertG - You can't forget the members delinquent. It's 75% written approval of Owners entitled to cast more than seventy-five percent (75%) of the total votes in the Association. Those delinquent are not entitled. Therefore, according to your statement that tells us basically delinquent is automatic loss of a vote, it's more than 75% of those not delinquent or in your case 76% of 700. 100 voted so 10% Quorum was achieved. 80 voted yes, 20 voted no. You need 452 more votes to pass the matter. If there is no statute of limitations on the matter, or if your well within the statute of limitations than send out a second notice and try to get more votes from those votes you currently don't have.

I do respectfully question your belief that delinquency equals automatic removal to vote. Unless your documents clearly state it. Typically, an owner must be duly notified of delinquency, sometimes by-laws state 30 days delinquent.

BruceF - According to the example given it's 75% of those votes entitled. Out of 800, only 700 are apparently entitled to vote due to delinquency. Actually I need to revise my math. More than 75% is 75.1%, or 526 owners must vote to approve, therefore it's 526 owners. 100 voted, 80 voted yes so RobertG needs 446 more yes votes to approve.

BruceF - I do believe you need to forget about Robert's Rules, especially with this post. Unless Robert's must be followed by the association any norm of interpretation that it requires is irrelevant.

Bruce - The norm should be the existing by-laws and local, state and federal laws. 75.1% or 75.01 is more than 75%. RobertG's documents state more than 75%. The result incorporating RobertG's facts is more than 75% of 700. The entire membership is 800 but 100 are delinquent and according to RobertG not entitled to vote.

BruceF1 - As for delinquency removing the right to vote, read JosephW's post and RobertG's response. JosephW asked, does delinquency remove the right to vote? RobertG answered YES. We must believe RobertG at his word, or ask him to provide verification. The norm is the set of documents that all owners automatically have to accept through the purchase of a home in the association. I'm not going to get into any more discussion regarding how to interpret bylaws, or some kind of proper procedure for interpreting them.

BruceF1 - The possible # of votes (2000 or 5000)is just the base amount. In RobertG's scenario, he needs "more than" 75%. What does "more than" mean? Technically it's 75% plus 1 vote, or in Robert's case 525 + 1. I used the 75.1% and 75.01% because it just so happens that 75.1% equals 525.7 and 75.01 525.07, so rounding up for both works out to be the same thing. You can't have .7 or .07 of a vote.

Yes there should be rules that pertain to each association. And in RobertG's case there are rules. Robert's Rules of Order however do not apply in this given situation. It's very important for those posting to understand that RRO are not gospel unless the docs. refer to them or just so happen to have the language written in.

DonnaS,
I'm afaid that I may not have been clear enough and some people now believe I have said things that do not think I have said, or at least, intended to say. Let me try to make things clearer, at the risk of making things worse.

I do not dispute the fact that the association documents CCRs, bylaws, etc.) and the state laws govern the association, and they have a prescribed order of precedence. However, when you say that such documents "do not allow" are you stating the such documents actually PROHIBIT the use of parliamentary procedure or Robert's Rules? I don't think you are saying that.

The problem is that statutes, CCRs, bylaws, etc. simply don't cover everything. When a question arises that is not addressed in the statutes, CCRs, bylaws, etc., where do you turn? How do you decide what is correct? Do you just know the answer? What if what you know doesn't happen to agree with what someone else knows? How do you decide who is right? Don't say the governing documents, because I've already stated that the answer isn't to be found there.

I have never said that Robert's Rules, or any other parliamentary authority (and I can name a few) is REQUIRED, nor did I state that when they conflict with other governing documents that Robert's Rules supercedes them. Just the opposite is true. In fact, even where bylaws may (note, I said may) require the use of Robert's Rules, typical wording may say something like this: "The rules contained in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the Society IN ALL CASES TO WHICH THEY ARE APPLICABLE AND IN WHICH THEY ARE NOT INCONSISTENT WITH these bylaws, the Declaration and the statutes." I've emphasised a portion in capitals because, what this means is, "if it ain't in here (the bylaws, Declaration and statutes) look in there (Robert's Rules)"

So, even if formal rules are not required or adopted, where do you look for the answer when you can't find it in the governing documents? The only place I can think of is some rules of parlimentary procedure. What would you suggest? I suggest that you need a "rule book" to find the answer. There are several, but Robert's Rules is handy because it's the most common.

Now, if you don't believe what I am saying, just read some of the questions in this forum. A few deal with interpretations of bylaws and such, and as you read through the responses you can note that they are not all the same. There are several points of view. Why? Because we are all not coming from the same frame of reference. We are not all using a rule book to guide us. How well would a board function if there were all these points of view to deal with.

I could demonstrate what I am saying by posing several questions from my own documents and I'll bet I would get different answers. I may try that some day.

There are several good articles that have been published about parlimentary procedures for community associations. I've attached one article. It's from the magazine published by the Community Association Institute. If you haven't heard of the CAI, it's an organization that board members, and even homeowners can join. There are benefits to membership. You might look it up. its www.caionline.org I apologize for the format of the article. The original pdf version was to big to attach.

Have I made my point any clearer? I'm just trying to be helpful.

Bruce - My docs don't specify that RRO or Sturgis can't be used. If the Board wishes to adopt them as a Board procedure for Board interaction there's nothing to stop them from doing so. However, if the Board wishes to institute the practices and formality in either it probably has to go to a community vote to add the requirement to our governing documents. Because it isn't a rule or regulation that expands upon or clarifies an already rule. Certainly the Board should provide or outline for all owners the procedure they are following for making motions, code of conduct in meetings, etc. Most non-board members, or people who've never had the honor of serving are unfamiliar with RRO or Sturgis or any parliamentary procedure. Thank you for posting the article, it was very informative. : )