refuses to change minutes

[smastiff]

President refuses to change minutes of council meeting  even though 4 out of 7 directors find the minutes  not a good representative of the meeting , people were named in minutes and conversations quoted falsely.   President says she will only change if someone has better notes then her. How can we force her to change minutes?

 

[Atul Kapur]

First of all, under RONR, minutes shouldn't include conversations or even a summary of the debate. "the minutes should contain mainly a record of what was done at the meeting, not what was said by the members. The minutes should never reflect the secretary's opinion, favorable or otherwise, on anything said or done." (p. 468, ll. 17-20).

Second, Minutes are approved by the body that held the meeting, not just by the chair (or the secretary). "The chair calls for the reading of the minutes, asks for any corrections, then declares the minutes approved, as shown on pages 354–55." (p. 474, ll. 5-7).

p. 354, ll. 28-33: "the chair asks, "Are there any corrections to the minutes?" and pauses. Corrections, when proposed, are usually handled by unanimous consent (pp. 54–56), but if any member objects to a proposed correction—which is, in effect, a subsidiary motion to Amend—the usual rules governing consideration of amendments to a main motion are applicable (see 12)."

Third, if the chair refuses to put a properly made motion (such as the motion to Amend / Correct the minutes), then the provisions of Section 62 come into play "Remedies for Abuse of Authority by the Chair in a Meeting". p.650-ff state that if the chair "ignores a motion properly made and seconded" then someone should raise a Point of Order and, if necessary, take an Appeal from the decision. RONR goes on to tell you what to do if the chair ignores the Point of Order or ignores the Appeal, up to removing this person from the Chair.

Now those are the rules. To make them reality requires majority votes, so that involves pre-work and discussion with others. But that's beyond what's in RONR.

[Hieu H. Huynh]

It is the duty of the secretary to keep the minutes. The minutes would reflect what the body approved.

[jstackpo]

Time for a new president?

[Richard Brown]

Agreeing with the others, the president should have nothing to do with the minutes. A draft of the minutes is prepared by the secretary. Those draft minutes are then corrected and approved by the assembly which was meeting, not by the president. The president has no more control over the minutes than any other member of the organization. The membership itself (of the body which was meeting) is in control of what is in the minutes, which should be a record of what was done, not what was said. Until the minutes are approved by the body which was meeting, they are merely draft minutes.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 5/28/2018 at 12:29 AM, smastiff said:

President refuses to change minutes of council meeting  even though 4 out of 7 directors find the minutes  not a good representative of the meeting , people were named in minutes and conversations quoted falsely.   President says she will only change if someone has better notes then her. How can we force her to change minutes?

 

The president has no such authority.  Corrections to the minutes, if they are in any way controversial, are decided by a majority vote, and the secretary makes the correction, or not, accordingly.  Raise a Point of Order that this rule is not being followed, and be prepared to Appeal.  If need be, the president can be subject to discipline.

[Richard Brown]

Agreeing again with all of my colleagues, I would urge you, smastiff, to learn about how to appeal from the ruling of the chair and to be prepared to do so.  When I say "be prepared to do so", I don't mean just the mechanics of an appeal, but to have already discussed the situation with other members who agree with you and to have them prepared to back you up with a second and a vote to overrule the decision of the chair.  Just knowing the mechanics of how an appeal works doesn't help you much if nobody else knows what you are doing and how to support you and your appeal. One of the best ways to convince your colleagues in your organization that the president is wrong is to show them this discussion... or to show it to them in the book.

That advice holds true anytime you are having to take action to deal with a difficult chair or one who doesn't understand the rules.  It's not enough for you to be the only one who knows what should be done. You usually need support from others when you are going to challenge the chair on procedure.

Note:  You might pick up a copy of Robert's Rules  of Order Newly Revised in Brief, by the authorship team of the "big book".  It's only about $7.50 and it gives you the basics of proper parliamentary procedure. It's an excellent book for those who just want the basics: http://www.robertsrules.com/inbrief.html

Another book which I recommend for those who find the "big book", aka RONR aka  "The Right Book" to be a bit intimidating is Robert's Rules for Dummies by C. Alan Jennings.  It's currently in its third edition.  It is not a substitute for RONR but is rather a book about RONR and can be an excellent aid in understanding some of the more complex provisions of RONR.

[smastiff]

 hi thank you so much