Re: #03: Board meeting quorum issues

From: Taral <taral(at)taral(dot)net>
To: spi-bylaws(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
Subject: Re: #03: Board meeting quorum issues
Date: 2003-05-31 06:37:10
Message-ID: 20030531063710.GA2522@taral.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: spi-bylaws

On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 08:38:00PM -0400, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> Strike:
> The presence of not less than two-thirds of the board members shall
> constitute a quorum and shall be necessary to conduct the business of
> this organization, but a lesser number may adjourn the meeting for a
> period of not more than two weeks from the date scheduled by these
> by-laws and the Secretary shall cause a notice of this scheduled meeting
> to be sent to all those members who were not present at the meeting
> originally called. A quorum as hereinbefore set forth shall be required
> at any adjourned meeting.
>
> Replace with:
> There shall be no quorum requirement for a meeting to take place.
> However, no individual vote taken by the board may be binding without
> the participation of at least half the board members. If two-thirds of
> the board members participate, then a simple majority shall be required
> for passage, unless the item being voted on sets a higher requirement.
> If fewer than two-thirds of the board members participate, then
> unanimous approval of the members present with no abstentions shall be
> required.

Well, it has this interesting cusp effect where one more person can
reduce the required number of votes, but it's something. My vote is FOR.

--
Taral <taral(at)taral(dot)net>
This message is digitally signed. Please PGP encrypt mail to me.
"Most parents have better things to do with their time than take care of
their children." -- Me

Browse spi-bylaws by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Goerzen 2003-05-31 13:53:48 Re: #03: Board meeting quorum issues
Previous Message David Graham 2003-05-31 02:23:32 Re: #03: Board meeting quorum issues