If no quorum is present, is the doucmented discussion still considered minutes?

[Guest Cathy]

And we a formal vote be required?

[Guest Edgar]

If no quorum is present, is the doucmented discussion still considered minutes? And we a formal vote be required?

Discussion doesn't belong in the minutes in the first place, quorum present or not.

The minutes of an "inquorate" meeting will be quite brief.

[Tim Wynn]

Minutes should be kept for each meeting of an assembly, whether or not a quorum is present. The content of those minutes should follow the form described in RONR (11th ed.), Section 48.

The minutes should be read and approved at the next meeting that has a quorum.

[J. J.]

As a rule "discussion" should not be documented, even if the meeting had a quorum.

[sMargaret]

As a rule "discussion" should not be documented, even if the meeting had a quorum.

Mind you, I believe that a brief note in the minutes - say, "In the absence of a quorum, a brief discussion was held regarding opinions on the colour to paint the tennis courts" - would not be banned, and indeed would be useful for the records of the association.

Documenting "John said that orange was the only colour to choose, and then Mary said that she and many other preferred green, and then John called Mary an idiot, and then Mark asked why we couldn't all just get along..." would be completely out of line for minutes, however.

[J. J.]

Mind you, I believe that a brief note in the minutes - say, "In the absence of a quorum, a brief discussion was held regarding opinions on the colour to paint the tennis courts" - would not be banned, and indeed would be useful for the records of the association.

The discussion is in order. What isn't correct it to record it in the minutes, even at a quorate meeting, in most cases.

Documenting "John said that orange was the only colour to choose, and then Mary said that she and many other preferred green, and then John called Mary an idiot, and then Mark asked why we couldn't all just get along..." would be completely out of line for minutes, however.

If those were considered disorderly words, they might properly be in the minutes.

[Tim Wynn]

Mind you, I believe that a brief note in the minutes - say, "In the absence of a quorum, a brief discussion was held regarding opinions on the colour to paint the tennis courts" - would not be banned, and indeed would be useful for the records of the association.

I don't see how it would be useful, and it doesn't belong in the minutes. Also, everyone knows that you paint the tennis courts green.

[sMargaret]

I don't see how it would be useful, and it doesn't belong in the minutes. Also, everyone knows that you paint the tennis courts green.

I can see various instances where it can be useful, such as for members who could not attend the meeting, and to those looking back at the historical record of the organization. An organization needs to have minutes that work for that organization. As an example, I like having action items specified in minutes. While the motion that was voted on may be "Set up a conference planning committee", there may be separate action items that don't rise to the level of a motion, but were discussed and benefit the association by being recorded (ie, Mary to email members and arrange meeting date, John to get updated financial statements to bring to committee, Mark to review paint costs).

In other words, adding some custom rules for the organization to go beyond what RONR states for minutes.

Also, on behalf of my 8 year old daughter, everyone knows that you paint everything pink.

[Tim Wynn]

Also, on behalf of my 8 year old daughter, everyone knows that you paint everything pink.

Tell her I'll change my vote to pink.

[J. J.]

I can see various instances where it can be useful,

While it might be useful, or detrimental, it is still the rule not to include it (p. 468, ll. 16-18).

[David A Foulkes]

And we a formal vote be required?

Not sure what the "formal vote" would be on (either you left out a word, or "we" should be "would"), but I can only assume at this point that you are talking about a vote on approval of the minutes. No vote should be taken on the approval of the minutes (at the next quorate meeting) of this inquorate, or any, meeting.

After any proposed corrections have been disposed of, and when there is no response to the chair's inquiry, "Are there any corrections [or "further corrections"] to the minutes?" the chair says, "There being no corrections [or "no further corrections"] to the minutes, the minutes stand [or "are"] approved [or "approved as read," or "approved as corrected"]." The minutes are thus approved without any formal vote, even if a motion for their approval has been made. The only proper way to object to the approval of the secretary's draft of the minutes is to offer a correction to it. It should be noted that a member's absence from the meeting for which minutes are being approved does not prevent the member from participating in their correction or approval. (RONR 11th ed. p. 354 l. 34 - p. 355 l. 11)

[TrevorSorensen]

If mentioning discussion in the minutes, would it be acceptable to insert "A brief discussion was held regarding opinions on the colour to paint the tennis courts" if it was approved by the assembly? A snag would be since there is a lack of quorum, no motion outside of those on pages 347-348 is acceptable.

Maybe something to the sorts could be added in the special rules of order to redefine what minutes should contain?

[Gary c Tesser]

If mentioning discussion in the minutes, would it be acceptable to insert "A brief discussion was held regarding opinions on the colour to paint the tennis courts" if it was approved by the assembly? A snag would be since there is a lack of quorum, no motion outside of those on pages 347-348 is acceptable.

Well, of course it would be acceptable if approved by the assembly. Assemblies can do everything idiotic they want to. That's what democracy is for. And yes, thank heavens for lack of a quorum when we need it.

Maybe something to the sorts could be added in the special rules of order to redefine what minutes should contain?

Sure. Let the special rules redefine that the minutes should be read aloud at every meeting, in Lithuanian, while we're at it.

(Nice lectern. Can I borrow it?)

[TrevorSorensen]

Sure. Let the special rules redefine that the minutes should be read aloud at every meeting, in Lithuanian, while we're at it.

If it is that important to them, I think it would work out. It should probably be very specific to stop the idiots from manipulating it.

(Nice lectern. Can I borrow it?)

Sorry, it's the convention center's. It was also falling apart so you may not want it =)

[Tim Wynn]

If it is that important to them, I think it would work out. It should probably be very specific to stop the idiots from manipulating it.

I think the important thing is for the members to better understand the purpose of the minutes and their proper content.

The minutes are not a periodical newsletter to the members on current events. The minutes are the official record of what was done at the meeting. At an inquorate meeting, very little is done, and any discussion of paint color is as meaningful as whatever was discussed in the car on the way to the meeting (I stole that analogy from my brother).

[sMargaret]

Hmm - something I've seen done is for the chair to request the person taking the minutes to note a particular matter (ie, please note in the minutes that a discussion was held regarding paint colours).

Does that make it any better? It still increases the usefulness of the minutes, and is more compliant with RONR.

[Guest Edgar]

Does that make it any better?

No. The chair has no such authority.

[sMargaret]

Even if the chair were to say "if there are no objections," (pause), "can the secretary please note that a discussion was held regarding paint colours"?

Or how about "Motion: That the minutes note a discussion was held regarding paint colours"?

Just looking for that balance between useful & compliant.

[Tim Wynn]

Even if the chair were to say "if there are no objections," (pause), "can the secretary please note that a discussion was held regarding paint colours"?

Or how about "Motion: That the minutes note a discussion was held regarding paint colours"?

Just looking for that balance between useful & compliant.

Can you explain how it's of any use to include a note in the minutes indicating that the assembly didn't do anything?

If a member wants the discussion referenced in the minutes, he should raise a point if order that discussion while no motion is pending is out of order. All points of order are to be included in the minutes.

In a quorate meeting, to comply with the rules, a member should make a motion That the tennis courts be painted. Proper debate can follow, with the possibility of amending the motion, referring it to a committee, postponing it to the next meeting, or simply adopting or rejecting it. This will also get it into the minutes, and it's the right way to do it.

[tctheatc]

Hmm - something I've seen done is for the chair to request the person taking the minutes to note a particular matter (ie, please note in the minutes that a discussion was held regarding paint colours).

Does that make it any better? It still increases the usefulness of the minutes, and is more compliant with RONR.

That doesn't make the minutes more useful. rather, it uses the minutes for a purpose other than for which they are intended. As explained above (#15, Tim) the minutes are not a newsletter. Neither is a printed agenda a newsletter - so would it be a good idea to, on the agenda, also list the rationale for every item of business and proposed action, including how the idea came about, and who proposed it, who thought it was a swell idea or a bad idea, how the proposed motion was formulated, including any revisions and previous versions? Some might consider that useful info. But that's not what an agenda is for, so it likely shouldn't be used for that. same with the minutes - don't use them to give everyone a history of how ideas, thoughts, or actions were discussed prior to taking the action.

[Josh Martin]

Even if the chair were to say "if there are no objections," (pause), "can the secretary please note that a discussion was held regarding paint colours"?

Or how about "Motion: That the minutes note a discussion was held regarding paint colours"?

I think this makes it worse, since the chair is usurping the authority of the assembly. If the assembly is going to put unnecessary things in its minutes it should be up to the assembly to decide which unnecessary things to include.

On a more serious note, I managed to find an old post on the topic of "putting more in the minutes" that I've requoted a few times:

I have no objection to a society keeping more extensive records of its meetings for historical value, although I think it is generally preferable if such records are kept separately from the minutes. Personally, I would recommend the following approach if the church board finds value in such records:

-Continue keeping your more extensive records when preparing a draft.

-Keep the more extensive records as the "historical record" of the society's actions.

-Condense the more extensive records into the information needed for the minutes, and keep these separately.

-Since the historical records have already been kept, compiling them into a history may be done if desired, and it may be advisable to appoint a Historian for such a purpose (since as you note, this would cause additional work for the Secretary).

This approach has the added advantage of placing only the true minutes before the assembly for approval at a given meeting, while the historical records would likely be approved annually (possibly after being compiled into a more convenient format). Additionally, this will make it considerably easier to find basic information in the minutes (such as motions) when this is needed, and it will only be necessary to read the more extensive records when more information is desired. So it might be a little more work on the front end, but I suspect in the long run it will save time for the Secretary and the assembly.

[Gary Novosielski]

Hmm - something I've seen done is for the chair to request the person taking the minutes to note a particular matter (ie, please note in the minutes that a discussion was held regarding paint colours).

Does that make it any better? It still increases the usefulness of the minutes, and is more compliant with RONR.

No, it's less compliant. The chair's duty is to see that the rules are followed, not to concoct new and creative ways for them to be violated.

(That's the members' job. <chortle>)