Gary Novosielski

As far as I can remember the only titles I've heard used for the recording officer are secretary, scribe, or clerk. In courts, there is often a stenographer, but that's not a deliberative assembly, and the job is quite different. Added: When they make a mistake it's sometimes referred to as a "scrivener's error" but I have not heard one actually called a scrivener.

Same here.

Oh, neither do I, but even unpersuasive arguments can waste significant time if an ambiguity affords an opportunist the opportunity to make them.

It's not clear to me whether the unanimous vote requirement applies to the situation where financial loss might occur, or whether it applies only to the "emergency" case. A person motivated to suspend the bylaws might argue that unanimity is only required in the emergency case, and then assert that suspension is in order to avoid the possibility of any financial loss, no matter how small or unlikely.

... even if only two vote in favor, for that matter.

Agreed. In small boards it is often easier to get a majority of the entire membership than a 2/3 vote. But there are technical differences. A majority vote still means "of those present and voting", so there is no minimum number of votes required to pass a motion, as long as the Yes votes outnumber the No votes. A vote of 1-0 would suffice, if the remaining 8 did not vote. But a majority of the entire membership (in this case 5 of 9) would mean that five votes would be needed in all cases, even if some members abstained or were absent.

No, not even a unanimous vote would do at this point. Votes can only be changed immediately after the vote is announced. Once the next item of business begins, that's all she wrote.

They're not allowed unless your bylaws provide for them. That's nothing new.

On the other hand, if it says "may not be elected" I think that would apply to the vote of the board to "appoint" them. It's actually an election, just by a different body.

Challenging the minutes is a waste of time. The minutes reflect a 4-4 vote because that's what was recorded at the time. Changing the minutes will not magically pass the motion. Fortunately, the motion can simply be made again at the next meeting and presumably passed if the votes are there.

The president should be disciplined. And meetings of which not all members have been notified are not "properly called" and any business conducted at them is null and void.

Have we even established whether this one vote would make a difference in the outcome?

I know. I just wanted to see who would point it out. 😷

If you're lucky.

Ooooookay.