Minutes

[Guest Carolyn]

At a convention when the minutes are recorded, are they recorded as the events happened or are they recorded according to agenda?  For example, if various chairmen are giving reports and due to one reason or another, the reports are interrupted by another activities such as a skit, and following the skit you go back to the reports, do you record in the minutes the reports, the skit, and the continuation of reports?  Or do you record all the reports together since that is the way it is printed on the agenda?  Is there Robert's Rules to back up the correct way to do this?

[Rob Elsman]

I don't think there is a rule in RONR that speaks to this.

[Josh Martin]

1 hour ago, Guest Carolyn said:

At a convention when the minutes are recorded, are they recorded as the events happened or are they recorded according to agenda?  For example, if various chairmen are giving reports and due to one reason or another, the reports are interrupted by another activities such as a skit, and following the skit you go back to the reports, do you record in the minutes the reports, the skit, and the continuation of reports?  Or do you record all the reports together since that is the way it is printed on the agenda?  Is there Robert's Rules to back up the correct way to do this?

I concur with Mr. Elsman that RONR has no firm answer to the general question one way or the other, although my personal preference would be for chronological order.

I would note, however, that the example given would not be an issue if the minutes were taken in compliance with RONR, as the skit does not belong in the minutes at all. Additionally, the minutes should only record the fact that the the reports were given, and any motions arising from the reports. The reports themselves should not be in the minutes.

Edited October 4, 2019 at 05:11 PM by Josh Martin

[Gary Novosielski]

But if, as is likely, the assembly took a Recess in order to watch the skit, it would be proper to record that in the minutes. 

[Rob Elsman]

A privileged motion to Recess need not be recorded in the minutes. See RONR (11th ed.), pp. 468-473.

[Gary Novosielski]

17 minutes ago, reelsman said:

A privileged motion to Recess need not be recorded in the minutes. See RONR (11th ed.), pp. 468-473.

That's not how I read p. 468.  And in any case I said it would be proper, not mandatory. 

I think this could depend on whether one thought that the notation would be beneficial to clarity, for which I think a case could be made.

[Rob Elsman]

I have consistently interpreted pp. 468-473 in the light of the principle of interpretation 4) on pp. 589, 590. In effect, the inclusion of certain items to be recorded also implies the exclusion of other items of the same class. I have previously opined that recording something other requires a suspension of the rules by a two-thirds vote, since what is said on pp. 468-473 is a rule of order according to the definition given on p. 15.

[Atul Kapur]

I agree with those who have a preference for recording minutes in chronological order.

The first reason is that the minutes should contain mainly a record of what was done at the meeting. The agenda lists items in the order that they were planned to be done. In this case that differs from what actually happened, and I would put more weight on reality than planning.

The second reason is more practical. The draft minutes are taken down as events occur. Recording the minutes in chronological order avoids having to "cut and paste" sections and, therefore, minimizes the chances of errors or omissions.

[Gary Novosielski]

28 minutes ago, reelsman said:

I have consistently interpreted pp. 468-473 in the light of the principle of interpretation 4) on pp. 589, 590. In effect, the inclusion of certain items to be recorded also implies the exclusion of other items of the same class. I have previously opined that recording something other requires a suspension of the rules by a two-thirds vote, since what is said on pp. 468-473 is a rule of order according to the definition given on p. 15.

Fine, but Recess is explicitly listed as an item to be recorded, if needed for completeness or clarity.  And that's an easy case to make.  At least it seems it would be much easier to assert that it helped completeness than to try to suspend the rule saying that it should. 

I wouldn't even bother objecting to a unanimous consent request if it came to that.  No harm, no foul, no breach.

[Rob Elsman]

Mr. Novosielski is referring to item 7) on p. 470. With respect to Recess, such a passing allusion would only rarely add anything of any lasting importance, clarity, or completeness. The only case that comes to my mind is a situation where an item of business was not taken up at its assigned hour because the meeting was in recess at that hour. Even then, one might ask why such a passing allusion to a recess would be of any lasting interest.