Unanimous Consent and Meeting Minutes

[Guest Nissa]

For minutes to be approved by a board or committee, unanimous consent is required.  What is the protocol when all but one member of a committee/board agree that the minutes are correct, and after following all proper protocol, that one member still will not concede that the current minutes are correct?   How can the minutes be approved then?

[Edgar Guest]

For minutes to be approved by a board or committee, unanimous consent is required.

 

Not exactly.

 

If a member objects to the proposed minutes, his only option is to suggest a correction. That correction is subject to a majority vote.

 

Once all corrections have been dispensed with, the chair should declare the minutes approved (as corrected). 

[Timothy]

Although, the vote on the correction is often by unanimous consent, unless it is a contentious issue.

[Dan Honemann]

Although, the vote on the correction is often by unanimous consent, unless it is a contentious issue.

 

The vote is often by unanimous consent? 

[Rev Ed]

The member can offer corrections, but if a majority of members disagree with the correction then the member can do nothing more.

[Guest Nancy N.]

The member can offer corrections, but if a majority of members disagree with the correction then the member can do nothing more.

 

Lad, sometimes you are an undeniable credit to your red bus.

[g40]

In my experience as a member of several organizations, one of the contentious issues that comes up from time to time - that can throw a meeting of the organization or Board (whichever entity is meeting) into turmoil (or worse) is approval of minutes, when an adamant/disruptive member of the entity meeting does not like (for some reason) the draft minutes of a/the previous meeting being presented for approval. All they "know" or will offer is that the draft minutes are not correct (but have/know/offer no corrections). Instead of following RONR, the meeting chair often just adds fuel to the fire and the ensuing disorder can go on for an extended period.

 

As correctly stated in other posts, the only ( think) thing the member disagreeing with the draft minutes can do (that is in order under RONR) is offer a "correction" - that could be voted on if there is disagreement about the offered correction. Then move on to any other offered corrections, until none are offered.

 

The key, in my opinion, to keeping a disgruntled member from throwing the meeting into turmoil - is that the Chair of the meeting insist that any disagreement with the draft minutes be addressed by an offered correction.

 

At one very nasty and nearly out of control meeting of our neighborhood association, a disruptive/adamant member was allowed by the chair to continue to state that she was not sure what her motion was at the previous meeting, but she "knew" it was NOT what the draft minutes said.

[Shmuel Gerber]

The key, in my opinion, to keeping a disgruntled member from throwing the meeting into turmoil - is that the Chair of the meeting insist that any disagreement with the draft minutes be addressed by an offered correction.

 

At one very nasty and nearly out of control meeting of our neighborhood association, a disruptive/adamant member was allowed by the chair to continue to state that she was not sure what her motion was at the previous meeting, but she "knew" it was NOT what the draft minutes said.

 

But was the adamant member correct or not? I'm sure it's happened to most of us that we don't remember exactly what we said, but we know quite definitely what we did not say.

[g40]

I don't know whether she was correct or not. This was a motion, by her, recorded in the draft minutes and the draft minutes stated that the motion passed. She did not disagree that her motion passed, but she disagreed with the wording of the motion in the draft minutes. While some others seemed to agree that the motion may have been worded differently, nobody could or would offer a correction. 

[Weldon Merritt]

This seems to be a perfect example of why all but the most simple motions (and maybe even most of them) should be presented in writing.

[Dan Honemann]

I don't know whether she was correct or not. This was a motion, by her, recorded in the draft minutes and the draft minutes stated that the motion passed. She did not disagree that her motion passed, but she disagreed with the wording of the motion in the draft minutes. While some others seemed to agree that the motion may have been worded differently, nobody could or would offer a correction. 

 

In which event, if no further corrections are offered,  the chair declares the minutes approved and the meeting moves on.