I would agree with this, a two-thirds vote of the CCs voting, with no quorum required. I have never seen a local election that had a 2/3rd vote requirement, though. David On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Angie Rayfield wrote: > And having seen at least one occasion where someone actively proposed > that people not vote, thus preventing a quorum, I personally am in favor > of removing the quorum requirement. I actually would prefer to see a > "super majority" of those voting -- in our local elections, we usually > see a requirement of 2/3 of the votes cast. > > There's a very good reason that most elections don't require a quorum > (except in organizations where you can more effectively require people > to vote!) -- because most people *don't* vote. Why should everything > come to a standstill or be effectively held hostage by the apathetic > majority? Should we be encouraging more members to vote? Well, of > course we should. But I think we have to be realistic enough to take > into consideration that the USGWP election is no different than any > other election. Most people just want to be left alone and don't much > care about the "politics" of the thing. > > Angie > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Joy Fisher [mailto:sdgenweb@yahoo.com] > >Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 4:16 PM > >To: STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com > >Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] bylaws revision > > > > > >It would take 51 votes against the SC to recall. > > > >It is not a majority of those voting, but a majority > >of the CCs. > > > >--- "David W. Morgan" <damorgan@nyx.net> wrote: > >> On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Joy Fisher wrote: > >> > >> > David -- do the math > >> > > >> > 2/3 of 75% = 50% which is a majority > >> > >> And if 20 vote for the SC and 17 vote against the > >> SC, and there are > >> 100 CCs in the state, the minority throws out the > >> SC. > >> > >> The 75% is not included in the revision. > >> > >> David > >> > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > --- damorgan@nyx.net wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > From: "Roger Swafford" > >> <sagitta56@mchsi.com> > >> > > > Subject: [STATE-COORD] Bylaws Revision -- > >> News > >> > > > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 16:12:05 -0500 > >> > > >(**Please forward to all appropriate project > >> > > lists**) > >> > > > > >> > > >The Bylaws Revision Committee (BRC) has > >> completed a > >> > > first draft revision of > >> > > >Section 7 of Article XI. State Projects. > >> > > > > >> > > >Section 7. State Coordinators and Assistant > >> State > >> > > Coordinators > >> > > >are subject to removal for valid cause; by vote > >> of > >> > > the Advisory Board, or by > >> > > >majority vote of the Local Coordinators within > >> the > >> > > state subsequent to a > >> > > >recall petition submitted to and approved by > >> the > >> > > Advisory Board. > >> > > > > >> > > >All revision drafts may be viewed at > >> > > http://home.mchsi.com/~sagitta56/ > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > The current version of Article XII, Section 9 (I > >> > > think), says that > >> > > the SC can be removed with a 2/3rds vote of the > >> > > state volunteers, with > >> > > 75% voting. > >> > > > >> > > This is a radical change, going from 2/3rds to a > >> > > majority vote. I guess > >> > > since the recall failed in Georgia, it was > >> decided > >> > > to make it easier > >> > > to remove an SC you are mad at. > >> > > > >> > > Look out, Tim! > >> > > > >> > > Let's get on with the voting on the bylaws. I > >> have > >> > > my NO vote ready. > >> > > > >> > > David > >> > > TX > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > __________________________________ > >> > Do you Yahoo!? > >> > The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product > >> search > >> > http://shopping.yahoo.com > >> > > >> > >> David W. Morgan damorgan@nyx.net Honolulu > >> Hawaii > >> SC - TXGenWeb > >> http://www.rootsweb.com/~txgenweb/ > >> FM - > >> http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/tx/txfiles.htm > >> ** http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~dmorgan/ > >> > > > > > >__________________________________ > >Do you Yahoo!? > >The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search > >http://shopping.yahoo.com > > > >--- > >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > >Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003 > > > > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003 > > David W. Morgan damorgan@nyx.net Honolulu Hawaii SC - TXGenWeb http://www.rootsweb.com/~txgenweb/ FM - http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/tx/txfiles.htm ** http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~dmorgan/