correspondence received

[Guest mark]

At the beginning of our meetings, the CEO presents a binder of information labelled "correspondence received" and expects us to adopt it as submitted, without summary, even though none of the board members has seen much of it until it is dropped on the table. Our we able to request that all correspondence be read aloud to us before we vote on its adoption? What is our responsibility after having adopted it? Are we at risk for not being aware of its contents?

[Guest Edgar]

Are we able to request that all correspondence be read aloud to us before we vote on its adoption?

A majority could certainly order that some or all of the correspondence be read aloud (or otherwise made available for examination). I would certainly vote "no" on any motion to "adopt" (or accept or approve) a document I hadn't read (although I do it online for "privacy policies" all the time!).

[Dan Honemann]

At the beginning of our meetings, the CEO presents a binder of information labelled "correspondence received" and expects us to adopt it as submitted, without summary, even though none of the board members has seen much of it until it is dropped on the table. Our we able to request that all correspondence be read aloud to us before we vote on its adoption? What is our responsibility after having adopted it? Are we at risk for not being aware of its contents?

The notion of adopting correspondence, especially "correspondence received", is one which is completely foreign to me (in other words, I have no idea what you are talking about), but:

"When any paper is laid before the assembly for action, it is a right of every member that it be read once; and, if there is any debate or amendment, that it be read again before members are asked to vote on it." (RONR, 11th ed., p. 299, ll. 4-8).

[Trina]

At the beginning of our meetings, the CEO presents a binder of information labelled "correspondence received" and expects us to adopt it as submitted, without summary, even though none of the board members has seen much of it until it is dropped on the table. Our we able to request that all correspondence be read aloud to us before we vote on its adoption? What is our responsibility after having adopted it? Are we at risk for not being aware of its contents?

Why is your group 'adopting' the correspondence at all? This is certainly not a practice described in RONR. In fact, even most officers' reports (e.g. the routine monthly treasurer's report) are not supposed to be adopted, according to RONR. When an assembly listens to reports or information, it is not necessary or appropriate to adopt everything that is listened to. Adoption is not the same thing as saying, "yes, we heard it" -- it's more like "we accept everything we just heard, and formally agree that it is correct in every detail."

Adopting anything without reading it is a bad idea, of course, in or out of the meeting room.

[Gary Novosielski]

At the beginning of our meetings, the CEO presents a binder of information labelled "correspondence received" and expects us to adopt it as submitted, without summary, even though none of the board members has seen much of it until it is dropped on the table. Our we able to request that all correspondence be read aloud to us before we vote on its adoption? What is our responsibility after having adopted it? Are we at risk for not being aware of its contents?

What if some of the correspondence said that you should give me your car. Would you vote to adopt that? If so, please adopt this message.

in other words, the idea of "adopting" correspondence is nonsense.

[Guest Nancy N.]

Wow, a silver Porsche reference. It's been quite a while.

[Gary Novosielski]

Wow, a silver Porsche reference. It's been quite a while.

Actually, I drive a gold Prius.