What are the disadvantages to reducing quorum percentage?

Roger, had mention to amend the by-laws to reduce your quorum requirement to 10%.Would this be wise? When I posted “Should your vote count”, I received some mixed views about reducing quorum percentage, A- in order to vote the by-laws states that you must be in good standings(which is the way it should be, I don’t disagree with that at all) to be eligible to vote. B- I want to reduce quorum percentage, so that anyone volunteering for the BOD doesn’t have to ever go through what I had to go through. If I didn’t feel the way I do, then I wouldn’t have done all I had thus far. I felt as if I would be given up if I didn’t do all I could to get on the board.

I feel that the percentage should be out of the people present and eligible or by proxy only. It shouldn’t be a percentage of the total eligible voters. That’s BS! My wife and I have been talking and we understand that the builder set this percentage to be fair. I don’t see any disadvantages to reducing quorum percentage. Is there any?

We had more volunteers for our first election. So from that first election to September 23, we stated with five total volunteers, two decided not to run! I believe if the elections would have happened we would have had two more board members. They decided not to run because they could see that the ballot had enough, so they figured “Well I was only going to run if they didn’t have enough people and it appears they do now so……”

I know what I’m thinking but, don’t know how to ask. Sorry about that.

I am always very appreciative of all the advice I received thus far. Many of you are very familiar with the by-laws and CC&Rs. All of the advice I have received has helped me tremendously. I now have two boards! LOL
Thank you, once again
Chuck W.

CharlesW,

A good reference for many aspects of governance of a POA is Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised. This book is periodically updated with the latest being the 10th edition. An abbreviated version is now also available, and likely meets the needs of most POAs. The shorter version is a good place to start.

The basic rule for quorums is to have the largest possible and still be able to conduct business. A small quorum leads to the possibility of a small group with a minority view attending and passing motions that wouldn't be broadly supported.

Since participation varies from one POA to another (higher in residential CIDs to lower in resort PUDs with second homes and seasonal residents), I favor basing the quorum on the actual level of participation, such as the greater of 10% of all members or 33% of the average number of valid ballots in last three elections for the board of directors.

In a similar way, the number of signatures for calling a special members' meeting could be the greater of 5% of all members or 17% of the average number of valid ballots in last three elections for the board of stewards, but not more that 10% of all members.

Obviously, the statistics on attendance and voting in your POA would help you select good numbers for your POA.

Chuck,

I couldn't disagree more with an effort to amend By-laws to reduce or raise a quorum requirement from it's original stated percentage.

Your By-laws states 25% of members in good standing which in your case can be 69 owners. A reduction to 10% would be 28 owners, less than half the originally stated 25%.

I do not believe the percentage requirement for quorum is structured to make it easy or hard for anyone to get on the board. I believe your efforts to achieve board member status are comendable. However, don't take the hard work personal.

I believe a quorum percentage makes sure that those who wish to serve convey their message to a broad audience. Amending your by-laws to a quorum of 28 out of 275, IMO falls short. Ultimately, I believe the reduction you propose will create too intimate a group of supporters. Seek measures to expand the horizons, you may be surprised what the quite types have to contribute.

Not to forget you MAY need 25% of members in good standing to make the reduction you propose in the first place?

At the end of the day, of the 25% quorum, you just need a simple majority to achieve an outcome?

Why not consider proposing a blanket proxy from the owners to the association board valid for the sole purpose of holding a vote meeting, valid for a blanket period of time. The specifics can be ironed out such as seeking advise from the association's attorney on concurrence with the existing by-laws, recalling the owner's proxy if not in good standing, etc.

I encourage you to develop methods that raise the bar, rather than lower the threshold.

Best of success!!
GeraldT1
NNJ