Our condo association invited all the members to a meeting. A number of people did not attend.

Q: Is it possible to make decisions if some of the members do not attend the meeting? Some of those who could not attend sent in their vote on a card. Does that count as a vote?

A: Poskim debate about how to reckon those who did not show up at the scheduled meeting to vote. Some maintain that those who do not attend the meeting forgo their voting rights and the matter is decided by the majority of those who did attend (Chasam Sofer, C.M. 116). Others maintain that decisions cannot be made when members of the group are absent, even if the group in attendance votes unanimously in favor of the proposed change (Maharit 1:58; Mishpat Shalom 231; Kuntres Tikkun Olam 6).In our previous articles we wrote that nowadays decisions are determined by a majority vote and a unanimous decision is not necessary. We also mentioned the dispute about whether all the partners must vote or whether that requirement is reserved for beis din. Your question, however, involves another factor. Let’s say that 60 percent of the members came to the meeting and a decision was made with a simple majority of those present. That would mean that less than 50 percent of the total members voted in favor of the issue. Is a decision reached under such circumstances binding?

Common custom is that the decision made by the majority who attend the meeting is binding, because if decisions could only be made when there is a majority of total residents voting in favor of the decision it would be almost impossible to make decisions. People are busy and it is difficult to schedule a meeting when such a large percentage of the members would be present. Therefore, it is assumed that it is sufficient to inform everyone of the upcoming scheduled meeting and that decisions will be made based on the majority vote of those in attendance (Igros Moshe, C.M. 2:20).

Those members’ votes that were submitted in writing are not counted since they did not attend the meeting. Since they were not present to hear the debate they may not realize that others maintained a different opinion. Even if they are aware that there are different perspectives, they are not qualified to formulate an informed opinion since they did not hear anyone argue in favor of another position, which is the purpose of holding a public meeting before taking a vote. (Seemingly, if someone who could not physically attend listened to the meeting by phone, he should be able to vote since he would have an informed opinion about the matter.)

Obviously, if the bylaws allow absentee voting or if common custom is to accept absentee voting, the absentee votes would count (Igros Moshe, ibid.). Clearly, if some of the members were not informed in advance of the meeting, the meeting and vote would have no validity whatsoever. This is true if even one member was not informed about the scheduled meeting.

In summary, all the members must be informed of the scheduled meeting and then decisions can be made according to the majority of those who attend the meeting.