Florida Quorum Statute

Florida HOA Arbitrator Ruling. ... The 2005 annual meeting/election was conducted on February 21, 2005. According to its answer, the association is comprised of 1,606 total voting interests and 109 interests were present in person at the meeting and 435 were present by proxy. Thus, a total of 544 interests [less than 34%] were present, either in person or by proxy, in compliance with quorum requirements of section 720.306(l), Florida Statute, requiring 30% of the voting interests to achieve quorum, unless a lower number is provided in the bylaws. As the bylaws require a higher percentage for quorum, the statute controls and 30% is required. ...

http://www.ccfjedu.net/DBPRarbrulingHOAelection.html

Florida 720.306.1.a. Unless a lower number is provided in the bylaws, the percentage of voting interests required to constitute a quorum at a meeting of the members shall be 30 percent of the total voting interests. ...

http://www.ccfjedu.net/HOAFS720.306-2007.htm

Roberts Rules states that unless a lower quorum number or percentage is stated in the Bylaws of a society, the quorum is to be a majority, although Roberts Rules suggests a quorum smaller than a majority for most voluntary societies, stating that it should be the largest number or percentage that can be reasonably certain to attend meetings, and stating and that one number or percentage does not fit all societies, hence the provision in the Bylaws of each society.

The primary purpose of a quorum is to require a large enough number or percentage to prevent an unrepresentative action by an unduly small number of members, as stated in Roberts Rules, with the secondary purpose being to require a small enough number or percentage to allow business to be transacted.

Florida 720.306.1.a provides a 30% quorum requirement for any Association that does NOT have a specified quorum number or percentage in the Bylaws of the Association. The statute states that it should be 30%, that is, UNLESS the Bylaws specify a smaller number or percentage.

What appears to me to be IMPLICIT in this Florida statute is that if the Bylaws of an Association determine that a quorum should be higher than 30%, such as a majority, then THAT is what the quorum for that Association SHOULD be.

Nevertheless, this Arbitrator quoted above interpreted this Florida statue to mean that any Bylaw of an Association that specifies a quorum percentage that is higher than 30% is wrong and is to be ignored.

Is it just me, or does it also seem to you that the way that this particular Arbitrator reads this statute is illogical? Is it logical that a quorum percentage higher than 30%, even if specified in the Bylaws of an Association, is NOT ALLOWED in Florida?

The language of the statute states that “UNLESS a LOWER number is provided in the bylaws, the percentage ... shall be 30 percent.”

Does this not IMPLY that the percentage is to be AT LEAST 30%, UNLESS a LOWER percentage is stated in the Bylaws of the Association, NOT that the percentage is to be NO MORE THAN 30%, UNLESS a LOWER percentage is stated in the Bylaws of the Association?

Does this statute not describe the MINIMUM percentage, UNLESS stated otherwise in the Bylaws, NOT the MAXIMUM percentage, UNLESS stated otherwise in the Bylaws?

According to the higher quorum percentage in the Bylaws of the Association regarding which the Arbitrator was making a ruling, a quorum was NOT established, but according to the 30% quorum percentage in the statute, it was.

No IMO the arbitrator got it right while the quorum requirement can be lower than 30% it can be no higher:

(a) Unless a lower number is provided in the bylaws, the percentage of voting interests required to constitute a quorum at a meeting of the members shall be 30 percent of the total voting interests. Unless otherwise provided in this chapter or in the articles of incorporation or bylaws, decisions that require a vote of the members must be made by the concurrence of at least a majority of the voting interests present, in person or by proxy, at a meeting at which a quorum has been attained.

This is for a general members meeting for a meeting to change the by-laws, AOI, etc. you need both (concurrence)the 30% quorum AND at least a majority of the voting interests present, in person or by proxy.

Mary with all due respect; I think you need to re-read the first sentence of the statute: Unless a lower number is provided in the bylaws, the percentage of voting interests required to constitute a quorum at a meeting of the members shall be 30 percent of the total voting interests.

Don't forget me!!! ;)

Glen,

I carefully read the statute. It only addresses bylaws which have a percentage lower than 30%. It doesn't address bylaws which state a percentage higher than 30%; therefore, IMO, if the bylaws do, then that percentage would apply. If the intent was to not allow a quorum requirement greater than 30% it should have been worded as: "Unless the community documents require a lower %, the quorum shall be no greater than 30%." Frankly this is an example of a poorly written statute.

The hierarchy of authority, top down is as follows (at least in Florida):

Federal
State
County
Municipality
Mandatory Community CCRs
HOA Articles of Incorporation
HOA By-laws

A lower authority cannot be more restrictive than a higher authority. It is most likely that your governing docs were written before the state law became effective and was the appropriate f quorum at the time. Now that your governing docs are more restrictive than the higher authority, the higher authority overrides your docs. It is best to amend your docs to include the restriction the owners want and also include a clarifying phrase something to the effect "or by law whichever is less restrictive."

For example, our docs were written in 1994 and states that quorum for an anuual members meeting is 10% of the voting interest (out of 322 homes) so we need 33 owners present in person or by proxy.

Since our docs were written so long ago, many other provisions in our CCRs, Aticles and By-laws are vague and out of compliance with higher authorities. Our Board is committed this year bring those docs into compliances and become owner-friendly to build community.

My apologies, I stand corrected. I phrased that argument backwards. The lower authority can be more restrictive as long as it does not break the higher authortity rule/law. What the Florida statue is doing is limiting how restrictive a quorum can be. So the quorum should be 30% or less.