Maitai Posted June 13, 2011 at 09:13 PM Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 at 09:13 PM Hello,Do meeting minutes have to be read or reviewed before they are approved? I think they do, but I was told, kind of harshly, that they don't. The way it works in my organization now is a motion is made to not read the minutes, that gets approved, then there's a motion following to approve the minutes, which also gets approved. Once in a great while the minutes are handed out a couple of minutes before the meeting starts, but the first thing on the agenda is approving the minutes, so people don't have time to read them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted June 13, 2011 at 09:15 PM Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 at 09:15 PM even if the minutes have been approved, you still have amending something previously adopted at your disposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maitai Posted June 13, 2011 at 09:23 PM Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 at 09:23 PM even if the minutes have been approved, you still have amending something previously adopted at your disposal.Ok, so you're saying that it's proper to approve minutes without them having been reviewed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted June 13, 2011 at 09:35 PM Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 at 09:35 PM Ok, so you're saying that it's proper to approve minutes without them having been reviewed?Yes, if no member requests them be read (RONR p. 457) so request they be read and be prepared to point out the page citation if need be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted June 13, 2011 at 09:36 PM Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 at 09:36 PM Ok, so you're saying that it's proper to approve minutes without them having been reviewed?Proper? No. Can you do it? Sure. They're your minutes. But you miss the whole point of the process, which is that the minutes become an official historical document of the assembly, the record of what took place at meetings, and quite more than likely a listing of the actual motions, bylaw amendments and so forth that were adopted. If you don't review them and make sure they're right, and just blindly approve them..... well, it's not proper, no. And I haven't heard anything about the chair asking for corrections in all this either. Bad chair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted June 13, 2011 at 09:36 PM Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 at 09:36 PM Hello,Do meeting minutes have to be read or reviewed before they are approved? I think they do, but I was told, kind of harshly, that they don't. The way it works in my organization now is a motion is made to not read the minutes, that gets approved, then there's a motion following to approve the minutes, which also gets approved. Once in a great while the minutes are handed out a couple of minutes before the meeting starts, but the first thing on the agenda is approving the minutes, so people don't have time to read them.<< Reading and Approval of Minutes. The chair says, "The Secretary will read the minutes." In all but the smallest meetings, the minutes are read by the secretary standing. In organizations where copies of the minutes of each previous meeting as prepared by the secretary are sent to all members in advance, the actual reading of them aloud may be waived if no member objects. In either case, the chair then asks, "Are there any corrections to the minutes?" and pauses. ... Whether or not a motion for approval has been offered, the chair may simply say, "If there are no corrections [or "no further corrections"], the minutes stand [or "are"] approved [or "approved as read," or "approved as corrected"]." >> (RONR 10th ed., p. 343) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maitai Posted June 13, 2011 at 10:00 PM Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 at 10:00 PM Proper? No. Can you do it? Sure. They're your minutes. But you miss the whole point of the process, which is that the minutes become an official historical document of the assembly, the record of what took place at meetings, and quite more than likely a listing of the actual motions, bylaw amendments and so forth that were adopted. If you don't review them and make sure they're right, and just blindly approve them..... well, it's not proper, no. And I haven't heard anything about the chair asking for corrections in all this either. Bad chair. It's an emergency services organization. I am the chair, but the chief is the one saying that they don't have to be read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerry4000 Posted June 13, 2011 at 10:38 PM Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 at 10:38 PM It's an emergency services organization. I am the chair, but the chief is the one saying that they don't have to be read.There is a BIG difference between not reviewing the minutes and not reading them. In most organizations, a draft of the minutes is distributed and the members can read/review the printed draft. In these days of copiers, word processors and inexpensive printers, that makes the most sense today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maitai Posted June 13, 2011 at 10:40 PM Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 at 10:40 PM There is a BIG difference between not reviewing the minutes and not reading them. In most organizations, a draft of the minutes is distributed and the members can read/review the printed draft. In these days of copiers, word processors and inexpensive printers, that makes the most sense today.He doesn't want them reviewed at all. He says that it isn't necessary and that he doesn't want our minutes to 'get out'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerry4000 Posted June 13, 2011 at 10:46 PM Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 at 10:46 PM He doesn't want them reviewed at all. He says that it isn't necessary and that he doesn't want our minutes to 'get out'.Who is running the show - and why? The board or the "chief"? Follow the rules and insist that everyone follow the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted June 13, 2011 at 10:57 PM Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 at 10:57 PM The minutes must be read on the demand of a single member. The Chief is wrong, and the more secretive he is about what's in the minutes, the more he should be suspected of having something to hide. A good presiding officer wants the minutes to be as accurate as possible, and will take the time to make sure that all appropriate corrections are made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted June 13, 2011 at 11:13 PM Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 at 11:13 PM Ok, so you're saying that it's proper to approve minutes without them having been reviewed?No, what I said was:even if the minutes have been approved, you still have amending something previously adopted at your disposal.You expressed concern that people didn't have time to read them (in your 1st post). To help alleviate that concern, I'm simply reminding you that once approved, they can be amended if need be. You have the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted June 14, 2011 at 04:01 AM Report Share Posted June 14, 2011 at 04:01 AM Do meeting minutes have to be read or reviewed before they are approved?They don't have to be, but it is generally a good idea.The way it works in my organization now is a motion is made to not read the minutes, that gets approved,A motion "to not read the minutes" requires unanimous consent for adoption. A single member may demand that the minutes be read.He doesn't want them reviewed at all. He says that it isn't necessary and that he doesn't want our minutes to 'get out'.While I suppose, strictly speaking, it is correct that it is not necessary to review the minutes, it is a very good idea as the minutes are the official record of the society. No matter how trusted the secretary is, everyone makes mistakes, and the assembly should always review the minutes before approving them. If the chief is worried about the minutes "getting out," this suggest to me that you may be putting too much information in your minutes, and quite possibly that your chief is excessively paranoid. If this is a legitimate concern for some reason, the logical course of action seems to be to have the minutes read at the meeting. In this way, only the Secretary will have the physical copy, and the members won't know anything they don't already know from attending the meetings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted June 14, 2011 at 10:57 AM Report Share Posted June 14, 2011 at 10:57 AM Bad chair. I am the chair...Sorr-eee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maitai Posted June 14, 2011 at 01:40 PM Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2011 at 01:40 PM The minutes must be read on the demand of a single member. The Chief is wrong, and the more secretive he is about what's in the minutes, the more he should be suspected of having something to hide. A good presiding officer wants the minutes to be as accurate as possible, and will take the time to make sure that all appropriate corrections are made.Thank you everyone for your replies. Is the above quoted anywhere in RR? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted June 14, 2011 at 02:20 PM Report Share Posted June 14, 2011 at 02:20 PM RONR p 343 lines 10-16"...the actual reading of them aloud may be waived if no member objects." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev Ed Posted June 14, 2011 at 03:38 PM Report Share Posted June 14, 2011 at 03:38 PM I concur with the others. A draft copy of the Minutes can be sent out before the meeting - then the members can read the Minutes. Then, at the meeting, the Chairman can state "Unless a member objects we will dispense with the reading of the Minutes. (Pause.) Are there are corrections? (Pause.) The Minutes are approved." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted June 14, 2011 at 04:05 PM Report Share Posted June 14, 2011 at 04:05 PM I concur with the others. A draft copy of the Minutes can be sent out before the meeting - then the members can read the Minutes. Then, at the meeting, the Chairman can state "Unless a member objects we will dispense with the reading of the Minutes. (Pause.) Are there are corrections? (Pause.) The Minutes are approved."The term is "waive" reading. "Dispense with" has a different meaning, and just delays the process till later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted June 16, 2011 at 11:01 AM Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 at 11:01 AM I'll also point out (belatedly, sorry) that if the Chief is not the Chair at the time, then as far as Robert's Rules is concerned, the chief has the same authority and status as every other member (and unless the Chief also has the office of Plenipotentiary Parliamentarian, maybe he needs to be emphatically advised to stick to his knitting).(n. b. Stretch "plenipotentiary.")(Edited to scratch an itch) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.