Executive meeting , minutes . naming

[smastiff]

Minutes . We had a speaker presenting a problem with club policy at executive meeting . After speaker finished presenting case she was asked to leave so executives could openly discuss issue. When executive minutes were sent to membership, conversations and opinions of one executive were quoted several times and not from any other member , not even the presidents opinions were entered. 

Since these conversations were private in executive should they have been sent to membership. 

 Should one NAMED members opinions be singled out and sent to membership in minutes.

Can minutes once excepted  be changed if it is found  inaccuracies  existed 

[jstackpo]

ANY "conversations" should not have been in the minutes, in the first place.

Yes you can amend adopted ("accepted") minutes.  I suggest you amend yours by removing all those conversations, leaving behind only what was done  --  motions adopted, defeated, &c.

[Richard Brown]

What the secretary put in the minutes was not correct, but first I have some questions concerning just what happened and your use of the terms "executive","executives",  "executive meeting" and "executive minutes".

What group was meeting?  Was this a meeting of the Executive Committee (or board), or a meeting of some other group in executive session, or a meeting of the executive board being conducted in executive session?    An executive session is a "secret" session.  Meetings of executive boards and committees are not necessarily conducted in executive session.

The comments of members should not be in the minutes regardless of whether they were "in private" or in executive session, but the prohibition is even stronger if the meeting was in executive session.  Minutes of a meeting... all meetings... should contain a record of what was done, not what was said.  No attempt should be made to quote or summarize comments or debate.

Minutes can always be corrected, even years after the fact.  When the minutes are first up for approval, they can be corrected by a regular majority vote, although it is usually done by unanimous consent.  However, if someone objects or there is disagreement, a majority vote settles the issue.  The body which was meeting is the body which approves the minutes of its own minutes meetings.

Once the minutes have been approved (whether as submitted or as corrected), they can still be corrected at a future meeting by use of the motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted.  The motion requires a majority vote if previous notice was given.  Without previous notice, it requires a two thirds vote or the vote of a majority of the entire membership.  If it is a board meeting, obtaining a majority of the entire board is often easier than a two thirds vote, especially if all members are in attendance. 

If the meeting at issue was in executive session, the minutes of that meeting, or  at least the part of it that was in executive session, should not be sent to the general membership or anyone else without the express permission of the body.  Doing so defeats the entire purpose of having the meeting in executive session.

Edited May 27, 2018 at 05:35 PM by Richard Brown
Corrected typo as indicated

[smastiff]

Yes this was a meeting of the board , president vice president  treasurer , secretary  and directors .   We had a speaker and after they were done they were asked them to leave so we could speak ,feely privately.  

[Guest Student]

Couple of issues to unpack here.1) normally, no one's opinions and no conversations are included in the minutes. Minutes record what was done, not what was said. Giving just one person's opinion and naming that person are further breaches of this rule.

2) Were the minutes actually adopted? Or are these draft minutes that were distributed? If draft (not yet formally approved by the executive), then they can just be corrected when they are read at the next meeting. Please note that the correction should be to delete the opinions rather than to add a "balanced" selection of the other opinions expressed :-)

If they are approved, then you should use the motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted.
 BTW, it's not clear whether these were distributed just to the executive or the entire membership of the body. If the letter, and if the executive meeting, by excluding the speaker, meant to move into executive session then there is a further breach of the rules around that, but that is not completely clear from your post.

[Richard Brown]

33 minutes ago, smastiff said:

Yes this was a meeting of the board , president vice president  treasurer , secretary  and directors .   We had a speaker and after they were done they were asked them to leave so we could speak ,feely privately.  

You still have not told us whether it was a regular board meeting or a meeting conducted in executive session.  It makes a difference in how the minutes are handed and in what can be disclosed to others.  Do you understand what the term "executive session" means?  

Edited to  add:  This what RONR says about an executive session on pages 95-96:

"An executive session in general parliamentary usage has come to mean any meeting of a deliberative assembly, or a portion of a meeting, at which the proceedings are secret. This term originally referred to the consideration of executive business—that is, presidential nominations to appointive offices, and treaties—behind closed doors in the United States Senate. The practice of organizations operating under the lodge system is equivalent to holding all regular meetings in executive session. In any society, certain matters relating to discipline (61, 63), such as trials, must be handled only in executive session. A meeting enters into executive session only when required by rule or established custom, or upon the adoption of a motion to do so. A motion to go into executive session is a question of privilege (19), and therefore is adopted by a majority vote.
Whenever a meeting is being held in executive session, only members of the body that is meeting, special invitees, and such employees or staff members as the body or its rules may determine to be necessary are allowed to remain in the hall. Thus, in the case of a board or committee meeting being [page 96] held in executive session, all persons—whether or not they are members of the organization—who are not members of the board or committee (and who are not otherwise specifically invited or entitled to attend) are excluded from the meeting.
A member of a society can be punished under disciplinary procedure if he violates the secrecy of an executive session. Anyone else permitted to be present is honor-bound not to divulge anything that occurred. The minutes, or record of proceedings, of an executive session must be read and acted upon only in executive session, unless that which would be reported in the minutes—that is, the action taken, as distinct from that which was said in debate—was not secret, or secrecy has been lifted by the assembly. When the minutes of an executive session must be considered for approval at an executive session held solely for that purpose, the brief minutes of the latter meeting are, or are assumed to be, approved by that meeting. "

Edited May 27, 2018 at 06:19 PM by Richard Brown
Added last paragraph

[Gary Novosielski]

1 hour ago, Richard Brown said:

What the secretary put in the minutes was not correct, but first I have some questions concerning just what happened and your use of the terms "executive","executives",  "executive meeting" and "executive minutes".

What group was meeting?  Was this a meeting of the Executive Committee (or board), or a meeting of some other group in executive session, or a meeting of the executive board being conducted in executive session?    An executive session is a "secret" session.  Meetings of executive boards and committees are not necessarily conducted in executive session.

The comments of members should not be in the minutes regardless of whether they were "in private" or in executive session, but the prohibition is even stronger if the meeting was in executive session.  Minutes of a meeting... all meetings... should contain a record of what was done, not what was said.  No attempt should be made to quote or summarize comments or debate.

Minutes can always be corrected, even years after the fact.  When the minutes are first up for approval, they can be corrected by a regular majority vote, although it is usually done by unanimous consent.  However, if someone objects or there is disagreement, a majority vote settles the issue.  The body which was meeting is the body which approves the minutes of its own minutes meetings.

Once the minutes have been approved (whether as submitted or as corrected), they can still be corrected at a future meeting by use of the motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted.  The motion requires a majority vote if previous notice was given.  Without previous notice, it requires a two thirds vote or the vote of a majority of the entire membership.  If it is a board meeting, obtaining a majority of the entire board is often easier than a two thirds vote, especially if all members are in attendance. 

If the meeting at issue was in executive session, the minutes of that meeting, or  at least the part of it that was in executive session, should not be sent to the general membership or anyone else without the express permission of the body.  Doing so defeats the entire purpose of having the meeting in executive session.

Does anyone think that the time may have come to change the name of "Executive Session" to something actually descriptive?  In my view, such a change would be even more beneficial than was the change of "Point of Information" to "Request for Information".

Just sayin'.

[smastiff]

 I think it was, but minutes do not show it .   They do not even show that the  speaker member was asked to leave while it was discussed in private .  So I guess we will have to   assume it was not executive session. This will not happen again .

This has really helped me a lot and we need to get thing running better and , You guys ROCK. 😉

[Guest Zev]

On ‎5‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 12:05 PM, Gary Novosielski said:

Does anyone think that the time may have come to change the name of "Executive Session" to something actually descriptive?  In my view, such a change would be even more beneficial than was the change of "Point of Information" to "Request for Information".

Just sayin'.

You mean, "executive session" to, lets say, "secret session?"

[Gary Novosielski]

Something like that, yeah.