Thank you for the response. While I somewhat understand what is being stated here:
If it becomes necessary to correct minutes after they have initially been approved, such correction can be made by means of the motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted. In this event, since the motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted is a main motion, the exact wording of that motion, whether adopted or rejected, should be entered in the minutes of the meeting at which it was considered. [RONR (11th ed.), p. 469, ll. 4-8; p. 475, ll. 18-24; see also p. 151 of RONRIB.]
I am questioning the fact that the correction is being made to a record of an email that was sent to the board (something that was simply said), and was not in a motion (something was done). Unless, of course, the minutes in its entirety is what was "Previously Adopted" and therefore is what is being amended.
I would hate to set a precedent of making motions to correct minutes that have already been adopted for something as simple as a name being misspelled when not involved in a main motion during a previous meeting; however, on the other hand, I do want to ensure that I am following correct protocol. I asked a similar question a couple of months ago, while that scenario addressed a members concern that information had not been disseminated to the appropriate individuals and inaccurate information had been relayed to the member who posed the question. That inaccurate information was included in the minutes as a record of that correspondence. I was told that the minutes were a record of what was done and not what was said; therefore, the minutes did not need to be corrected. I'm wondering if this was accurate.