mombny Posted January 22, 2015 at 04:33 AM Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 04:33 AM I could not attend the last board meeting of our organization due to illness. I read the minutes today. In there, the President made this statement: "Name of President wanted it to be recorded in the minutes that she had received an email from a Board Member who accused her in impugning the integrity and history of the Club. The person said other people agreed with her in this regard". I know for a fact that the Board member did not write that in the email, and that those words were used in a conversation in respect to the disregard of current constitution and by-laws, and complaints from other members - who were told to go the the current president with the complaint of bring it up at a meeting. As immediate past president, my position on this is that what the President did is 'out of order' and I would like to motion that it be stricken from the minutes after giving my rationale. My rationale is that whether it was an email or conversation it should not be on record in the minutes of a board meeting, since it did not occur during the board meeting, and had nothing to do with the business being conducted at the board meeting, or with anyone at that board meeting. How should this be handled? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hieu H. Huynh Posted January 22, 2015 at 12:46 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 12:46 PM Minutes are a record of what was done at a meeting (see FAQ #15). When the minutes are presented for approval at the next board meeting, any member can propose corrections. The corrections could be voted on and majority vote decides whether they'll go into the minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 22, 2015 at 12:56 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 12:56 PM And, in general, statements "for the record" can only get "on the record", i.e. in the minutes, if a motion is made and adopted at a meeting with "the statement" included as the text of the motion. A demand, or request, by any single member (even the president) is not sufficient to do the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 22, 2015 at 01:03 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 01:03 PM And, in general, statements "for the record" can only get "on the record", i.e. in the minutes, if a motion is made and adopted at a meeting with "the statement" included as the text of the motion. A demand, or request, by any single member (even the president) is not sufficient to do the job. If, however, an assembly grants a request to include a statement in the minutes, either by majority vote or by unanimous consent, then I would think it should be recorded in the minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 22, 2015 at 02:13 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 02:13 PM "Assembly grants", of course, gets the "statement" in the minutes. But I would sure hope that the "statement" is itself offered in writing, to avoid a whole host of "I never said that" "Oh, yes you did" arguments over the minutes next meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted January 22, 2015 at 03:07 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 03:07 PM If, however, an assembly grants a request to include a statement in the minutes, either by majority vote or by unanimous consent, then I would think it should be recorded in the minutes.If the assembly grants the request and a member wants to remove the statement from the minutes when the minutes are up for approval would that require adopting a motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted (or would it technically be Rescind since you would be removing previously approved wording from a text that hasn't been adopted yet?)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 22, 2015 at 05:09 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 05:09 PM If the assembly grants the request and a member wants to remove the statement from the minutes when the minutes are up for approval would that require adopting a motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted (or would it technically be Rescind since you would be removing previously approved wording from a text that hasn't been adopted yet?)? Interesting question. The motions to Rescind and to Amend Something Previously Adopted can be applied only to something made or created by the adoption of one or more main motions. If a request to have a statement included in the minutes is the kind of request referred to at the bottom of page 299, then it can be neither rescinded nor amended. I'm inclined to think that it is not such a request, but rather that it is an incidental main motion which, in this case, can be rescinded or amended because it has not yet been fully carried out (the minutes having not yet been approved). If this is, in fact, the case, then it will take more than a majority vote to remove the statement from the minutes to be approved unless previous notice of intent to do so has been given. Another way to look at it is that the granting of such a request (or the adoption of such a motion) is not to be regarded as final, since the minutes are not before the assembly for approval, but is at most a direction to the secretary to include the statement in the draft of minutes which will be presented for approval at the next meeting. I rather like this idea, since it means that the question (if it arises again) can then be decided by majority vote when the minutes are before the assembly for approval. Any other ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted January 22, 2015 at 06:05 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 06:05 PM Interesting question. The motions to Rescind and to Amend Something Previously Adopted can be applied only to something made or created by the adoption of one or more main motions. If a request to have a statement included in the minutes is the kind of request referred to at the bottom of page 299, then it can be neither rescinded nor amended. I'm inclined to think that it is not such a request, but rather that it is an incidental main motion which, in this case, can be rescinded or amended because it has not yet been fully carried out (the minutes having not yet been approved). If this is, in fact, the case, then it will take more than a majority vote to remove the statement from the minutes to be approved unless previous notice of intent to do so has been given. Another way to look at it is that the granting of such a request (or the adoption of such a motion) is not to be regarded as final, since the minutes are not before the assembly for approval, but is at most a direction to the secretary to include the statement in the draft of minutes which will be presented for approval at the next meeting. I rather like this idea, since it means that the question (if it arises again) can then be decided by majority vote when the minutes are before the assembly for approval. Any other ideas?I like your second way of looking at it. It seems to me that is the better method. An exception might be if the motion to include something in the minutes included the precise language to be inserted. In that case, it seems the argument could be made that it would take a motion to amend or rescind something previously adopted since the society had already voted on the precise verbiage to be inserted in the minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 22, 2015 at 06:57 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 06:57 PM An exception might be if the motion to include something in the minutes included the precise language to be inserted. In that case, it seems the argument could be made that it would take a motion to amend or rescind something previously adopted since the society had already voted on the precise verbiage to be inserted in the minutes. I think your "exception " goes too far (or isn't really an exception at all). Anything written in the minutes is "precise verbiage" -- that's what minutes are: specific words strung together. Dan's #2 view that a motion to "Include this text..." is an instruction to the secretary is the cleanest way of taking care of it. But what happens if the motion is defeated? According to THE BOOK, ALL motions go in the minutes, so the text will end up there anyway. This is absurd, but how do we get around it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted January 22, 2015 at 07:07 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 07:07 PM I respectfully disagree with the other way to look at it. Once the request is granted and he says his peace, it can't be unsaid. Approval of the minutes it isn't the place to rescind or amend what a previous assembly did or what it granted. It almost seems as the other way of viewing it is that its' a conditional granting, which I don't think is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 22, 2015 at 10:00 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 10:00 PM I respectfully disagree with the other way to look at it. Once the request is granted and he says his peace, it can't be unsaid. Approval of the minutes it isn't the place to rescind or amend what a previous assembly did or what it granted. It almost seems as the other way of viewing it is that its' a conditional granting, which I don't think is right. I don't blame you for disagreeing. I just sort of invented that way of looking at it because I don't like the idea of requiring more than a majority vote to determine what will or will not be included in the minutes at the time when they are pending for approval. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 22, 2015 at 10:10 PM Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 at 10:10 PM Looks like a patentable invention to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 23, 2015 at 12:01 AM Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 at 12:01 AM The motions to Rescind and to Amend Something Previously Adopted can be applied only to something made or created by the adoption of one or more main motions. If a request to have a statement included in the minutes is the kind of request referred to at the bottom of page 299, then it can be neither rescinded nor amended. I'm inclined to think that it is not such a request, but rather that it is an incidental main motion which, in this case, can be rescinded or amended because it has not yet been fully carried out (the minutes having not yet been approved). If this is, in fact, the case, then it will take more than a majority vote to remove the statement from the minutes to be approved unless previous notice of intent to do so has been given.But if the request is indeed an incidental main motion, then won't it be recorded in the minutes whether or not it is granted, since all main motions are recorded in the minutes? That doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense.Perhaps it would be better to view this as the sort of request discussed at the bottom of pg. 299.But what happens if the motion is defeated? According to THE BOOK, ALL motions go in the minutes, so the text will end up there anyway. This is absurd, but how do we get around it?All main motions are recorded in the minutes. Whether a request to include a statement in the minutes is a main motion is not entirely clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted January 23, 2015 at 07:14 PM Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 at 07:14 PM The motions to Rescind and to Amend Something Previously Adopted can be applied only to something made or created by the adoption of one or more main motions. If a request to have a statement included in the minutes is the kind of request referred to at the bottom of page 299, then it can be neither rescinded nor amended. I agree with George M. that "approval of the minutes [] isn't the place to rescind or amend what a previous assembly did or what it granted." If it is indeed the case that the granting of the request cannot be rescinded, then that means the minutes will have to include the statement, just as they have to include the record of, for example, a main motion which died for lack of a second or to which an objection to consideration was sustained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 23, 2015 at 07:24 PM Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 at 07:24 PM So it appears you are saying that the person who wants his statement "for the record" in the minutes, will get it there whether or not the motion to place it there is adopted or defeated (or postponed, for that matter). The motion would have to be somewhat carefully crafted, but I'm sure our opinionated friend could rise to that occasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted January 23, 2015 at 07:31 PM Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 at 07:31 PM So it appears you are saying that the person who wants his statement "for the record" in the minutes, will get it there whether or not the motion to place it there is adopted or defeated (or postponed, for that matter). The motion would have to be somewhat carefully crafted, but I'm sure our opinionated friend could rise to that occasion. Not so. As Josh M. has already pointed out, if the request is not a main motion then it is alluded to in the minutes only if it isn't lost or withdrawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted January 23, 2015 at 07:45 PM Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 at 07:45 PM If it is indeed the case that the granting of the request cannot be rescinded, then that means the minutes will have to include the statement. Actually, I was originally going to suggest that the assembly could simply grant a request to revoke the first request, but that would run afoul of the rule that "motions are out of order if they conflict with a motion that has been adopted by the society and has been neither rescinded, nor reconsidered and rejected after adoption" (p. 343, ll. 18-20). However, even under a rule that Rescind can be applied only to something that is in effect because of the adoption of one or more main motions, I don't see why the rules couldn't be suspended, by a two-thirds vote, for the purpose of undoing some other type of motion that it is not too late to undo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 23, 2015 at 08:48 PM Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 at 08:48 PM OK, but if the person was smart enough to cast his "request" in the form of a main motion ("Mr.Chairman, I move that the following text be included in the minutes of the meeting...") how can you prevent the text from showing up in the minutes even if the main motion is defeated (or not seconded, &c)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 23, 2015 at 09:01 PM Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 at 09:01 PM OK, but if the person was smart enough to cast his "request" in the form of a main motion ("Mr.Chairman, I move that the following text be included in the minutes of the meeting...") how can you prevent the text from showing up in the minutes even if the main motion is defeated (or not seconded, &c)? If it is rejected (or not seconded), no rule in RONR says that it must be included in the minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 23, 2015 at 09:08 PM Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 at 09:08 PM Actually, I was originally going to suggest that the assembly could simply grant a request to revoke the first request, but that would run afoul of the rule that "motions are out of order if they conflict with a motion that has been adopted by the society and has been neither rescinded, nor reconsidered and rejected after adoption" (p. 343, ll. 18-20). However, even under a rule that Rescind can be applied only to something that is in effect because of the adoption of one or more main motions, I don't see why the rules couldn't be suspended, by a two-thirds vote, for the purpose of undoing some other type of motion that it is not too late to undo. So when the minutes are presented for approval the request that was granted can be deleted from the minutes, but it will take a two-thirds vote to do so since it requires a suspension of the rules. Is this correct? I'm inclined to agree that the request can be deleted, but I still cling to the idea that a majority vote should suffice in view of the fact that the minutes do not become the minutes until approved. In Q&A 249 on page 499 of PL, General Robert says that, if a member requests that his vote be recorded in the minutes, it is proper for the chair to state the request and ask if there is any objection; that if there is no objection, the chair directs the secretary to make the entry; and that if an objection is made, the chair puts the question to a vote. He doesn't say so, but it appears that he is regarding this as a (now) page 299 request. The unanswered question is whether or not this direction to the secretary means that the secretary is to include the entry in the draft submitted for approval or that the assembly has decided that the minutes, after approval, are to contain the requested entry. I admit that it looks as if the latter is the case, but that doesn't mean that I like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 23, 2015 at 09:19 PM Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 at 09:19 PM If it is rejected (or not seconded), no rule in RONR says that it must be included in the minutes. Well, that's getting kinda flexible with your "should"s, but so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted January 25, 2015 at 02:22 AM Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 at 02:22 AM So when the minutes are presented for approval the request that was granted can be deleted from the minutes, but it will take a two-thirds vote to do so since it requires a suspension of the rules. Is this correct? I don't think revoking the request has anything to do with the procedure for approving the minutes except for two things: (1) The secretary may have already included the information in the draft minutes, so if the assembly revokes its granting of the request before the minutes are approved, the minutes will no longer be "correct," since they contain extra information that doesn't belong in them. (2) After the minutes are approved, it will be too late to revoke the granting of the request, since it has already been fully carried out. It's unfortunate that this question has come up with regard to a request to include completely extraneous information about something that didn't happen at the meeting, since that muddies the waters a bit. I'm inclined to agree that the request can be deleted, but I still cling to the idea that a majority vote should suffice in view of the fact that the minutes do not become the minutes until approved. . . .The unanswered question is whether or not this direction to the secretary means that the secretary is to include the entry in the draft submitted for approval or that the assembly has decided that the minutes, after approval, are to contain the requested entry. I admit that it looks as if the latter is the case, but that doesn't mean that I like it. Doesn't the fact that the minutes are not the minutes until they are approved point to the idea that any direction by the assembly as to what should be entered in the minutes refers to the approved minutes rather than the secretary's draft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted January 25, 2015 at 02:26 AM Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 at 02:26 AM OK, but if the person was smart enough to cast his "request" in the form of a main motion ("Mr.Chairman, I move that the following text be included in the minutes of the meeting...") how can you prevent the text from showing up in the minutes even if the main motion is defeated (or not seconded, &c)? I don't think it matters how the member casts the request. If this type of request is an incidental motion under parliamentary law, then it's an incidental motion even if made while no other question is pending. (I know this from reading the invisible SDCs of this invisible motion.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 25, 2015 at 12:37 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 at 12:37 PM I don't think revoking the request has anything to do with the procedure for approving the minutes except for two things: (1) The secretary may have already included the information in the draft minutes, so if the assembly revokes its granting of the request before the minutes are approved, the minutes will no longer be "correct," since they contain extra information that doesn't belong in them. (2) After the minutes are approved, it will be too late to revoke the granting of the request, since it has already been fully carried out. I think that a member's motion (made when the minutes are presented for approval) that the minutes be corrected by deleting the statement or information from them, is the motion which, if agreed to, will effectively rescind the granting of the request. As the rules now stand, it appears to me that this is the only way, without suspending the rules, to effectively reverse the granting of this sort of request if it is too late to move to reconsider it. It's unfortunate that this question has come up with regard to a request to include completely extraneous information about something that didn't happen at the meeting, since that muddies the waters a bit. Yes, we've all been ignoring this unfortunate aspect of the facts as originally presented. Furthermore, it's unclear that any request was actually granted, either by unanimous consent or by vote. Mr. Harrison's question, in post # 6, was simply too inviting. Doesn't the fact that the minutes are not the minutes until they are approved point to the idea that any direction by the assembly as to what should be entered in the minutes refers to the approved minutes rather than the secretary's draft? No, not at all. The secretary's draft, even before approval, is simply referred to as "the minutes", both in this forum and in RONR itself. However, as I previously indicated, it does seem to me that the assembly, by granting the request, has decided that the minutes, after approval, are to contain the requested entry. The question remains as to whether or not this decision can be effectively reversed when the minutes are before the assembly for approval, without some sort of suspension of the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 25, 2015 at 01:06 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 at 01:06 PM I don't think it matters how the member casts the request. If this type of request is an incidental motion under parliamentary law, then it's an incidental motion even if made while no other question is pending. (I know this from reading the invisible SDCs of this invisible motion.) Well, RONR, on page 292, lines 29-30, does tell us that this sort of request can be made at any time when no question is pending, with all of the following SDC's being applicable to it. However, if we return now to the fact that the original question in this thread relates to a request to include "completely extraneous information about something that didn't happen at the meeting" (as noted in post # 22), it does seem to be the sort of motion that should be treated as a main motion, if it is to be entertained at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.