Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'minutes format'.
Found 3 results
Please do feel free to say if this question is inappropriate for this forum. I am a public official and sit on an administrative quasi-judicial government body that oversees open meetings and public disclosure law for our city. We are having a bit of debate about what a passage's intent means in our governing open meetings law that pertains to meeting procedure. I thought my many years of practice in parliamentary procedure that the parliamentarian community may be a good place to check in albeit constitutional and legal construction subject matter experts. That said, the passage goes like this: " Any person speaking during a public comment period may supply a brief written summary of their comments which shall, if no more than 150 words, be included in the minutes." It is the phrase highlighted in yellow that is of concern. Before I give any further context or example, I would appreciate some comment on what folks think this means on the face of it with regards to placement in the minutes. Thank you for your indulgence. Bruce Wolfe
Our commission read over a proposal for services. It stated the description of services, timetable and terms for payment. The commission approved payment and the work is complete. Minutes of that meeting read “Resolution to approve the market analysis proposal from XYZ Group, not to exceed $Xx,Xxx . . . “ My question is : shouldn’t the motion read “..approve the expenditure for the market analysis proposal ..”? Or did we approve funding, not just OK the proposal?
Please can you tell me if Roberts Rules, 11th edition says anything about how meeting minutes should be typed? I know that withdrawn motions should not be included but how about the format of the minutes? We have a secretary who does it differently after every meeting and things that's just fine. It makes it difficult to read, especially when she center's everything on the page.