contested board minutes

[Guest DB]

RONR p 474 "Corrections, if any, and approval are normally done by unanimous consent"

-What happens in the case when motions have been deliberately left out of the minutes but but the minutes have the approval of the majority with a very significant minority (40%) of the board voting against their approval. Should the contested parts be recorded?

[Dan Honemann]

RONR p 474 "Corrections, if any, and approval are normally done by unanimous consent"

-What happens in the case when motions have been deliberately left out of the minutes but but the minutes have the approval of the majority with a very significant minority (40%) of the board voting against their approval. Should the contested parts be recorded?

Any suggested correction to the minutes that is not agreed to, either by unanimous consent or by majority vote, is not made.

[Guest DB]

Is there some other way to prevent the board from airbrushing out the fact that they approved paying the expenses for a trip to Hawaii for someone who had no right to reimbursement?

[jstackpo]

Throw the rascals out.

But that, unfortunately, doesn't get the money back in the association's treasury.

[George Mervosh]

Is there some other way to prevent the board from airbrushing out the fact that they approved paying the expenses for a trip to Hawaii for someone who had no right to reimbursement?

If a treasurer's report is made and the expense is shown in it, take another crack at amending those old minutes to reflect the action taken. RONR (11th ed.), p. 305ff. Perhaps seeing the expense in writing will make it hard to deny it happened.

If that doesn't work, as Dan noted, no corrections are made.

*edited to add the part about Dan's posting (which should usually be the end of the matter)