Ruth.L Posted April 22, 2017 at 12:28 AM Report Share Posted April 22, 2017 at 12:28 AM At the last membership meeting of my Florida co-op there were several new board members elected and also a new secretary. The old secretary is still a member of the board. At the next board meeting, the board will be approving minutes written by the OLD secretary, and these minutes contain a number of mistakes. Who should be making the corrections - the old or the new secretary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hieu H. Huynh Posted April 22, 2017 at 12:48 AM Report Share Posted April 22, 2017 at 12:48 AM I would think that the person who is the secretary would perform the duties of the secretary, while the person who is no longer the secretary would no longer perform those duties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth.L Posted April 22, 2017 at 01:15 AM Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2017 at 01:15 AM Thank you for your reply - it certainly makes sense and seems to be the logical thing to do. I'm just anticipating that it will be awkward for me, as the NEW secretary, to be making all these corrections to someone else's work when she's right there. How would the minutes be signed..."written by HER, corrected by ME"??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted April 22, 2017 at 01:26 AM Report Share Posted April 22, 2017 at 01:26 AM Signed like this: Approved, [date], your signature. No need for anything more. Don't forget, it is the association correcting and approving the minutes, not you; you are just the instrument. Take a look at page 468ff. I'll bet your predecessor was putting way too much in the minutes which could be the source of the errors. Don't fall into that trap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted April 22, 2017 at 03:03 PM Report Share Posted April 22, 2017 at 03:03 PM 13 hours ago, Ruth.L said: Thank you for your reply - it certainly makes sense and seems to be the logical thing to do. I'm just anticipating that it will be awkward for me, as the NEW secretary, to be making all these corrections to someone else's work when she's right there. How would the minutes be signed..."written by HER, corrected by ME"??? If you notice far enough in advance of the meeting that there are numerous mistakes in the draft minutes, there is nothing wrong with you or the president contacting the former secretary who took the minutes and asking if she would consider submitting a revised draft of the minutes. If you are on good terms and if she acknowledges the mistakes, that could make the approval process go faster and will produce cleaner minutes with fewer Corrections. As an alternative, if there are numerous errors, you or someone else may submit an entirely different draft of the minutes. The board can then decide which version to approve, or at least which version to use as the starting point. Nothing prevents other members from submitting their own draft version of minutes. As Dr. Stackpole pointed out, it is the assembly (in this case the board), not the former or present secretary, which actually makes the corrections to the minutes once they are on the floor for corrections. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexis Hunt Posted April 22, 2017 at 09:03 PM Report Share Posted April 22, 2017 at 09:03 PM 5 hours ago, Richard Brown said: As an alternative, if there are numerous errors, you or someone else may submit an entirely different draft of the minutes. The board can then decide which version to approve, or at least which version to use as the starting point. Nothing prevents other members from submitting their own draft version of minutes. I'm not sure I agree. The Secretary is responsible for presenting a single version of the minutes to assembly, and this can subsequently be corrected. But there is no process for substitution of the minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev Ed Posted April 22, 2017 at 11:48 PM Report Share Posted April 22, 2017 at 11:48 PM 2 hours ago, Alexis Hunt said: But there is no process for substitution of the minutes. Then what do you call corrections? You do not vote on the Minutes themselves, but on the corrections offered. As such, if necessary, another member could offer a completely different set of Minutes by way of moving to correct the Minutes with a new set of Minutes. Something along the lines of "I move that the Minutes be corrected through the draft version offered by Joe Smith." Someone else will likely provide a more accurate motion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weldon Merritt Posted April 23, 2017 at 01:59 AM Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 at 01:59 AM I'm surprised that no one has mentioned that RONR advises that when there will be a periodic change in the membership of the assembly (as by an election), the assembly should appoint a minutres approval committee to approve the mintues of the last meeting preceding the change. (I don't have my book handy to provide a cite, but I'm sure someone else will provide it.) That won't help the current situation, but it certainly could alleviate similar concerns in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted April 24, 2017 at 01:47 AM Report Share Posted April 24, 2017 at 01:47 AM On 4/22/2017 at 4:03 PM, Alexis Hunt said: But there is no process for substitution of the minutes. Why not? It seems like just another form of correction to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts