Guest Jerry Posted October 20, 2017 at 12:51 PM Report Share Posted October 20, 2017 at 12:51 PM After reading the minutes of the previous meeting is a motion and second required if there are no corrections or can the president call for a direct vote to accept the minutes as read? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted October 20, 2017 at 12:56 PM Report Share Posted October 20, 2017 at 12:56 PM No motion needs main or vote taken on the final approval. Once all corrections have been dealt with the chair simply declares the minutes approved without a vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 20, 2017 at 12:59 PM Report Share Posted October 20, 2017 at 12:59 PM Neither. The chair just declares the minutes approved. Page 354-355. No vote at all (unless there are corrections and folks disagree as to the text of the corrections. Then majority rules.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Havens Posted October 20, 2017 at 01:02 PM Report Share Posted October 20, 2017 at 01:02 PM George Mervosh, thank you for for your response. This has been my understanding but I have been challenged several times by one member. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted October 20, 2017 at 01:04 PM Report Share Posted October 20, 2017 at 01:04 PM See RONR (11th ed.), pp. 354-355 for the full passage on reading and approval of minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 20, 2017 at 01:05 PM Report Share Posted October 20, 2017 at 01:05 PM Ask your challenging friend to show you some rule that backs up his claim. (He won't find it in RONR!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted October 20, 2017 at 01:30 PM Report Share Posted October 20, 2017 at 01:30 PM Jerry Havens, these guys have got it cockeyed (or haywire, I forget which is which). If you only vote if there are corrections to vote on, and there are no corrections to vote on, then you can't vote (Q. E. D., eh Doc?), and if you can't vote, obviously there is no way you can accept the minutes. (These college graduates talk themselves into knots.) The minutes have to be kept into abeyance until someone can find an error to correct. It's never hard, nothing's perfect. For example, my biker club wanted to buy dancing shoes for our school booster-club uniforms, and we were 45 minutes hunting the next meeting for a correction, when triumphantly someone proclaimed that the minutes claimed that the motion to buy teal shoes had been amended to "chartreuse," but the proposed amendment had failed, which was a relief because we could then vote to correct the minutes and because now nobody had to find out what either word means. See? Not so complicated after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted October 20, 2017 at 02:46 PM Report Share Posted October 20, 2017 at 02:46 PM 1 hour ago, Gary c Tesser said: Jerry Havens, these guys have got it cockeyed (or haywire, I forget which is which). If you only vote if there are corrections to vote on, and there are no corrections to vote on, then you can't vote (Q. E. D., eh Doc?), and if you can't vote, obviously there is no way you can accept the minutes. (These college graduates talk themselves into knots.) The minutes have to be kept into abeyance until someone can find an error to correct. It's never hard, nothing's perfect. For example, my biker club wanted to buy dancing shoes for our school booster-club uniforms, and we were 45 minutes hunting the next meeting for a correction, when triumphantly someone proclaimed that the minutes claimed that the motion to buy teal shoes had been amended to "chartreuse," but the proposed amendment had failed, which was a relief because we could then vote to correct the minutes and because now nobody had to find out what either word means. See? Not so complicated after all. This explanation? No, not complicated at all, just utter nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted October 20, 2017 at 05:29 PM Report Share Posted October 20, 2017 at 05:29 PM 2 hours ago, Daniel H. Honemann said: This explanation? No, not complicated at all, just utter nonsense. Thanks. It took some work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts