MInutes

[Guest DD Latham]

Once the agenda has been accepted by the committee and the meeting starts, can the agenda be moved around to accommodate late arrivals? And if so how are the minutes written?  Do you keep with the original agenda order or do you write the minutes in the order at which the reports were given?

 

[Hieu H. Huynh]

Generally the minutes are a record of what was done at the meeting.

[Rob Elsman]

Committees generally do not use agendas or keep minutes.

[Joshua Katz]

I agree with the two answers above, but to address the questions asked in this instance:

5 hours ago, Guest DD Latham said:

Once the agenda has been accepted by the committee and the meeting starts, can the agenda be moved around to accommodate late arrivals?

If an agenda has been adopted, then yes, it can be "moved around," if by that you mean rearranging items on it. You would use the motion to amend something previously adopted, which requires a 2/3 vote or a majority of the entire membership voting in the affirmative (in this instance). 

 

5 hours ago, Guest DD Latham said:

And if so how are the minutes written?

The minutes should reflect what happened at the meeting. Thus, they record items in the order in which they come up at the meeting.

 

5 hours ago, Guest DD Latham said:

Do you keep with the original agenda order or do you write the minutes in the order at which the reports were given?

As noted, the minutes are a record of what is done at the meeting. Reports are not themselves recorded in the minutes.

[Atul Kapur]

7 hours ago, Guest DD Latham said:

Once the agenda has been accepted by the committee and the meeting starts, can the agenda be moved around to accommodate late arrivals?

 

2 hours ago, Joshua Katz said:

If an agenda has been adopted, then yes, it can be "moved around," if by that you mean rearranging items on it. You would use the motion to amend something previously adopted, which requires a 2/3 vote or a majority of the entire membership voting in the affirmative (in this instance). 

More commonly, if you are doing it to accommodate late arrival of people who need to be there (for example, someone who is to give a report has not yet arrived), then it is usually done by unanimous consent "John is not here yet to give his report. Is there any objection to hearing Mary's report now? There being no objection, Mary, please present your report."

 

7 hours ago, Guest DD Latham said:

And if so how are the minutes written?  Do you keep with the original agenda order or do you write the minutes in the order at which the reports were given?

 

2 hours ago, Joshua Katz said:

The minutes should reflect what happened at the meeting. Thus, they record items in the order in which they come up at the meeting.

The minutes record what was done, not necessarily when within the meeting. You can do the minutes in chronological order, but I don't think that is mandatory, unless it is necessary for the minutes to make sense.

[Joshua Katz]

4 minutes ago, Atul Kapur said:

The minutes record what was done, not necessarily when within the meeting. You can do the minutes in chronological order, but I don't think that is mandatory, unless it is necessary for the minutes to make sense.

Okay, but I don't see how it makes sense to instead record them in the order of an agenda that was later amended to look different.

[Richard Brown]

On 3/20/2020 at 6:36 PM, Atul Kapur said:

The minutes record what was done, not necessarily when within the meeting. You can do the minutes in chronological order, but I don't think that is mandatory, unless it is necessary for the minutes to make sense.

 

On 3/20/2020 at 6:41 PM, Joshua Katz said:

Okay, but I don't see how it makes sense to instead record them in the order of an agenda that was later amended to look different.

I think RONR is clear that minutes do not necessarily have to be in chronological order, but that is certainly the most common way of doing them.

[Josh Martin]

10 minutes ago, Richard Brown said:

I think RONR is clear that minutes do not necessarily have to be in chronological order, but that is certainly the most common way of doing them.

I don't think RONR says anything on this subject one way or the other. RONR prescribes that certain information be recorded in the first paragraph and that certain information be recorded in the last paragraph. For the rest, it says that there is a separate paragraph for each subject matter. Nothing is said regarding the order of these paragraphs, except that they certainly cannot be the first or last paragraph (as those spots are already taken).

I agree that chronological order is certainly the most common method, by far. I don't think I've ever seen an assembly record them in a different order. I agree, however, that this is not strictly required - but this is due to silence on the subject, not because RONR clearly states that it is so.

Edited March 22, 2020 at 02:40 PM by Josh Martin

[Gary Novosielski]

It's a little early in the day for me to be thinking very hard, but I can't come up with a potential benefit from recording the paragraphs out of chronological order.

It may be that the matter was omitted from RONR because it seemed to go without saying.

[Richard Brown]

14 minutes ago, Gary Novosielski said:

It's a little early in the day for me to be thinking very hard, but I can't come up with a potential benefit from recording the paragraphs out of chronological order.

It may be that the matter was omitted from RONR because it seemed to go without saying.

Perhaps it’s a bit unusual, but here is an example. Assume a rather important and perhaps complex or controversial motion is adopted early in a meeting. Later, near the end of the meeting, there is a motion to reconsider the previously adopted motion. It is substantially modified upon being reconsidered or might even be defeated upon reconsideration.

Over time,  perhaps months or even years later, a question arises whether the original motion was ever adopted.  It is quite possible that the person reviewing the old minutes to determine whether the motion was ever adopted would find where the motion was in fact adopted early in the meeting. Assume that this organization  keeps long and detailed minutes, as many do, sometimes consisting of several pages. It is quite possible that the person doing research, once he finds the paragraph stating that the motion was adopted, will stop reading and will never see the paragraph much further down in the minutes which says the motion was defeated upon reconsideration. 

Perhaps that situation is a bit unusual, but I have actually seen it happen.  It is an argument that can be made for deviating from a strictly chronological recording of the minutes at least in certain circumstances.

[Gary Novosielski]

What you suggest is entirely possible.  But the same could be said if those researching the matter failed to check the minutes of every meeting from that day to this, to see if the motion was rescinded or amended.  RONR does not require making a marginal note in the old minutes if an older motion is changed, even though it might be helpful.

[Joshua Katz]

10 hours ago, Richard Brown said:

Perhaps that situation is a bit unusual, but I have actually seen it happen.  It is an argument that can be made for deviating from a strictly chronological recording of the minutes at least in certain circumstances.

Maybe. But it's not an argument, I don't think, for writing the minutes in accordance with the draft version of an agenda that was amended before being adopted, or in accordance with an adopted agenda that was later amended.

[Richard Brown]

2 hours ago, Joshua Katz said:

Maybe. But it's not an argument, I don't think, for writing the minutes in accordance with the draft version of an agenda that was amended before being adopted, or in accordance with an adopted agenda that was later amended.

I agree.