post54 Posted December 11, 2014 at 09:10 AM Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 at 09:10 AM My condo board creates three minutes. In camera, Draft, and Posted. Where should the second motion be included? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted December 11, 2014 at 09:52 AM Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 at 09:52 AM Robert's Rules only envisions one set of minutes. Why does your condo board mess with more than that? And what second motion are you talking about? (Glad to help. Ask anytime.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
post54 Posted December 11, 2014 at 10:41 AM Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 at 10:41 AM Thank you Gary c Tesser for replying. In Camera minutes includes such things as arrears and employee salary raises. Essentially it contains anything the Board does not want anyone that is not on the Board to see.Draft minutes are presented to the Board for any corrections and it also includes owners names and unit numbers.The Posted (although I am not sure that is the correct term for the heading on the minutes that are distributed to owners) include corrections and owners names and unit numbers have been blacked out. With regard to the 'second motion' I am referring to the person on the Board at a meeting that seconds a motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted December 11, 2014 at 12:25 PM Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 at 12:25 PM The name of the seconder shouldn't be included in the minutes unless ordered by the assembly (RONR p. 470 ll. 26-28). If the Board wants to do so anyway it will be up to them to work out the details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted December 11, 2014 at 01:17 PM Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 at 01:17 PM I note with some dismay that none of these categories qualify as actual "minutes" which are the draft minutes after (correction and) approval. You do approve them and keep them, don't you? "In camera" minutes are what RONR would call the minutes of the executive session portion of your meetings. They are presumably also in a "draft" status until approved. (Their approval would also take place in executive session, since reading them and correcting them in public might compromise the confidentiality.) What you call "posted" minutes aren't official records at all, since they are redacted copies. As you're already taking liberties with what's in them, I wouldn't attempt to form an opinion on what belongs in them. Good luck with that. And of course the names of people who have seconded motions don't belong in any of the above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted December 11, 2014 at 01:29 PM Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 at 01:29 PM With regard to the 'second motion' I am referring to the person on the Board at a meeting that seconds a motion. Seconds aren't required at meetings of boards with not more than about a dozen members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted December 11, 2014 at 02:24 PM Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 at 02:24 PM I agree with those who said in this thread and in your other related thread that the minutes that you are "posting" are not minutes at all. What you are posting is some sort of summary. I would NOT call them "minutes". Call them "Summary of Minutes", "Meeting Summary", "Excerpts from Minutes", "Redacted Minutes" or whatever.... but not "Minutes. And certainly not "The Minutes". The minutes of an executive session should be kept separately from the minutes of a regular session, even if both phases occur in the same meeting. If your meeting is on December 11 and you go into executive session for part of that time to discuss personnel matters, you should actually have two sets of minutes from that meeting: One set titled "Minutes of the meeting of December 11, 2014" and the other set titled "Minutes of Executive Session of December 11, 2014" (or similar wording to differentiate between the two". The minutes of the regular meeting would reflect that, for example, "at 8:15 am, on motion of Mr. Jones, the meeting went into executive session to discuss the hiring of a new executive director. The executive session concluded at 8:23 am." Those minutes (of the regular session) would not include any details of what went on in the executive session. Those details would be in the minutes of the executive session. Edited to add: the minutes of your regular session probably do not need to include the reason for going into executive session.... only that you did go into executive session. Most public bodies, however, are required by law to state the reason for the executive session and that reason must be one permissible by law. That's the type situation I'm personally most familiar with. However, although not required by RONR, I think it is good, for various reasons, to at least state in general (and perhaps vague) terms the reason for the executive session.... such as "to discuss a personnel matter". Others may disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted December 11, 2014 at 02:42 PM Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 at 02:42 PM The minutes of an executive session should be kept separately from the minutes of a regular session, even if both phases occur in the same meeting. If your meeting is on December 11 and you go into executive session for part of that time to discuss personnel matters, you should actually have two sets of minutes from that meeting: One set titled "Minutes of the meeting of December 11, 2014" and the other set titled "Minutes of Executive Session of December 11, 2014" (or similar wording to differentiate between the two".I'm not sure I agree in this case. The only reason to keep the minutes of executive sessions separate is if the minutes are regularly available to people who are not members of the assembly. This doesn't really seem to be the case here. The board releases a modified version of the minutes to members of the society, so it can simply remove all of the sections relating to executive session. The minutes for the board's own records can all be kept together.Edited to add: the minutes of your regular session probably do not need to include the reason for going into executive session.... only that you did go into executive session. Most public bodies, however, are required by law to state the reason for the executive session and that reason must be one permissible by law. That's the type situation I'm personally most familiar with. However, although not required by RONR, I think it is good, for various reasons, to at least state in general (and perhaps vague) terms the reason for the executive session.... such as "to discuss a personnel matter". Others may disagree.If it is not required by the society's rules or applicable law, then such information will be included only if ordered by the assembly or if it is included in the motion to enter executive session (and that is made as a main motion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted December 11, 2014 at 02:56 PM Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 at 02:56 PM I'm not sure I agree in this case. The only reason to keep the minutes of executive sessions separate is if the minutes are regularly available to people who are not members of the assembly. This doesn't really seem to be the case here. The board releases a modified version of the minutes to members of the society, so it can simply remove all of the sections relating to executive session. The minutes for the board's own records can all be kept together.If it is not required by the society's rules or applicable law, then such information will be included only if ordered by the assembly or if it is included in the motion to enter executive session (and that is made as a main motion).Josh, I actually agree with both of your comments. It does seem that this board probably conducts all of its meetings either as "closed meetings" or in executive session, although we don't know that for a fact. If that is the case, and I was thinking of it as a possibility when I typed my response, then I agree there is no need to keep two separate sets of minutes and that it is perfectly proper for the board to release a redacted version or summary of the minutes for the benefit of the general membership. It's probably acceptable even if they do go into executive session as part of a regular meeting, as opposed to a separate meeting. As to stating a reason for going into executive session, i was indeed thinking in terms of it being included in the motion to go into executive session. An example would be, as I believe I stated, "Mr. President, I move that we go into executive session to discuss some personnel matters". Or, the chair could state, "If there is no objection, we will now go into executive session to discuss some personnel matters". Either method gets the reason for the executive session on the record.... and so that the other members have enough information to decide whether to vote to go into executive session in the first place. I would be hesitant to vote to go into executive session without knowing the reason for it. Routinely going into executive session when there is no real need to do so can result in abuse, especially in cases where the general membership, as with NAP, is allowed to "sit in on" board meetings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted December 11, 2014 at 07:16 PM Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 at 07:16 PM As to stating a reason for going into executive session, i was indeed thinking in terms of it being included in the motion to go into executive session. An example would be, as I believe I stated, "Mr. President, I move that we go into executive session to discuss some personnel matters". Or, the chair could state, "If there is no objection, we will now go into executive session to discuss some personnel matters". Either method gets the reason for the executive session on the record.... and so that the other members have enough information to decide whether to vote to go into executive session in the first place. I would be hesitant to vote to go into executive session without knowing the reason for it. Routinely going into executive session when there is no real need to do so can result in abuse, especially in cases where the general membership, as with NAP, is allowed to "sit in on" board meetings.This is all well and good, but the member could also inform the assembly of his reasons for wishing to enter executive session in debate, which would still inform the assembly of the need to enter executive session, but it would not be recorded in the minutes. A motion to enter executive session is debatable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted December 11, 2014 at 08:05 PM Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 at 08:05 PM This is all well and good, but the member could also inform the assembly of his reasons for wishing to enter executive session in debate, which would still inform the assembly of the need to enter executive session, but it would not be recorded in the minutes. A motion to enter executive session is debatable.I agree that the reason for the executive session could be stated in debate rather than in the motion, but my reason for preferring that it be stated in the motion is so that the reason for the executive session WILL be on the record (in the minutes). I'm just not big on secrecy. I like transparency. Secrecy breeds suspicion and suspicion breeds distrust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted December 12, 2014 at 03:48 PM Report Share Posted December 12, 2014 at 03:48 PM Add to the soup the fact that, in groups to which Sunshine Laws apply, there may be statutes that provide that board may legitimately go into executive session only for certain specific reasons, and that the reason(s) must be stated in the motion to go in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
post54 Posted December 15, 2014 at 06:12 AM Author Report Share Posted December 15, 2014 at 06:12 AM Seconds aren't required at meetings of boards with not more than about a dozen members.Could you please tell me what page in RONR it says this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted December 15, 2014 at 06:41 AM Report Share Posted December 15, 2014 at 06:41 AM Could you please tell me what page in RONR it says this. The small board rules are found in RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 487-488. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.