Opinions in Minutes

[Guest Paul Kryzinski]

At a recent meeting where a vote was required to reach a decision, a member requested the votes be counted in front of all members. Heretofore, votes were counted in an adjacent room by at least two people. The inference being that the member who requested the vote count take place in front of everyone had called the integrity of the two vote counters into question - ie that they could not be trusted to count the votes.

Subsequently, when the minutes of the meeting were released, the following text was used:

'As no consensus was likely the Chairman called a vote on the issue. To the surprise of both Vote Counter 1 and Vote Counter 2, the Objecting Member called their honesty and integrity into question by demanding the vote be counted in the room rather than the adjacent room'

The Objecting Member is furious that this was entered into the minutes despite being an accurate refection of what took place. My question is thus:

Was the language used in the minutes correct, (possibly a feeling that opinion was used)?

If not, what language would be appropriate?

[Dan Honemann]

No, the minutes should not have contained the secretary's opinion as to why the Chairman called for a vote on the issue (but should have mentioned that it was a ballot vote that was called for, as apparently this was the case), and should not have contained the secretary's opinion that the member's demand called into question the honesty and integrity of the tellers (but should have mentioned what action was taken in response to this demand - which, by the way, should only have been complied with if the assembly agreed to it).

[Richard Brown]

If you want a citation from RONR 11th edition to support the correct answer by Mr. Honemann as to the secretary injecting opinion into the minutes, you might look at page 468 which provides explicitly that "The minutes should never reflect the secretary's opinion, favorable or otherwise, on anything said or done."    RONR 11th edition, page 468, lines 18-20.