Correcting incorrecting worded motion

[EleanorUp]

In a special meeting of our Board a time sensitive vote had to be taken to allow for a change in an ongoing construction project. The motion to allow the change passed, but after the meeting - and before minutes were approved - we learned that we had used the incorrect building code requirement in the vote.  (ADA was cited at the meeting, when in fact, the code was the International Building Code.)   This was not an intentional error; it merely reflects that laypeople with no background in construction used the wrong terminology. 

 

How should this be handled when I send the minutes out for approval?  

[George Mervosh]

2 minutes ago, EleanorUp said:

In a special meeting of our Board a time sensitive vote had to be taken to allow for a change in an ongoing construction project. The motion to allow the change passed, but after the meeting - and before minutes were approved - we learned that we had used the incorrect building code requirement in the vote.  (ADA was cited at the meeting, when in fact, the code was the International Building Code.)   This was not an intentional error; it merely reflects that laypeople with no background in construction used the wrong terminology. 

 

How should this be handled when I send the minutes out for approval?  

You should send out the draft with the exact wording the chair used to put the question to a vote.  The board will need to amend the motion at a regular or properly called meeting if the wording in the adopted motion was incorrect.  The minutes are a record of what was done, and the problem you state in your facts can't be corrected by making changes to the minutes.

[Joshua Katz]

1 hour ago, EleanorUp said:

How should this be handled when I send the minutes out for approval?  

Agreeing with Mr. Mervosh, your problem here is not the minutes, and it doesn't matter that they haven't been approved. Your problem is that the motion is not the one you needed to pass, and you'll need to consider the right question at a future meeting. Any actions taken that are not authorized under the first motion will be at the risk of those who take them.

[EleanorUp]

Thank you, gentlemen. 

 

Here's the rub:  There was a term used in the passed motion (which has already been acted on, as it involved approving the go-ahead on a construction change order) that we learned was not the correct legal term. 

 

It appears we can "reconsider" the motion. Amending is out of the question since the motion has already been taken, and rescinding presents the same problem. 

 

Would it, then, be as "simple" as my entertaining a motion to reconsider, reading the previously approved motion, noting the terminology correction, taking a vote to reconsider, presenting the correctly worded motion, and then voting on that motion? 

 

Or is there another remedy? 

[George Mervosh]

22 minutes ago, EleanorUp said:

Thank you, gentlemen. 

 

Here's the rub:  There was a term used in the passed motion (which has already been acted on, as it involved approving the go-ahead on a construction change order) that we learned was not the correct legal term. 

 

It appears we can "reconsider" the motion. Amending is out of the question since the motion has already been taken, and rescinding presents the same problem. 

 

Would it, then, be as "simple" as my entertaining a motion to reconsider, reading the previously approved motion, noting the terminology correction, taking a vote to reconsider, presenting the correctly worded motion, and then voting on that motion? 

 

Or is there another remedy? 

It's far too late to reconsider the vote on the adopted main motion.  

[EleanorUp]

Then what remedy is available? 

 

We only meet sporadically, and have not had another opportunity to make this correction. 

[George Mervosh]

3 minutes ago, EleanorUp said:

Then what remedy is available? 

 

We only meet sporadically, and have not had another opportunity to make this correction. 

If the motion with the incorrect term was not carried out, I can't see why that motion can't be amended.  Someone else might see a reason why but I can't at this point.

[Atul Kapur]

Did someone actually tell the contractor to make the construction change order based on the incorrect ADA reference? 

If the order that was given to the contractor was actually to follow the correct International Building Code, then the assembly can ratify the action of the person who conveyed the correct information to the contractor.

I am not certain that you cannot Amend the motion previously adopted. It depends on the exact wording of the motion and the facts of what was communicated.

[EleanorUp]

This involved a change-order in an ongoing construction project.  A term was used regarding the reason for the change-order that, well after the meeting and after the construction crew had already begun the work, that we were informed was incorrect.  The ADA had been cited, when in fact, it was the International Building Code that the pertinent code.  (ADA compliance was not required.) 

 

That is the motion we want to correct to prevent there being any legal challenge based on ADA compliance. 

 

[EleanorUp]

Atul, 

 

Boy, THIS would be ever so much simpler.  

[Atul Kapur]

24 minutes ago, EleanorUp said:

This involved a change-order in an ongoing construction project.  A term was used regarding the reason for the change-order that, well after the meeting and after the construction crew had already begun the work, that we were informed was incorrect.  The ADA had been cited, when in fact, it was the International Building Code that the pertinent code.  (ADA compliance was not required.) 

 

That is the motion we want to correct to prevent there being any legal challenge based on ADA compliance. 

 

This reinforces my earlier point that the action that you need to or want to take depends on the exact wording of the motion. 

For example, if the motion was along the lines of "In order to be compliant with the ADA, we authorize that the construction project be changed by upgrading the doorway." 

Even if the order has already been given to the contractor, and if the change from ADA to IBC does not affect the particular upgrade that has been ordered, then I believe you could use Amend Something Previously Adopted. 

Other specific wording may require other remedies.

(The example wording that I used, based on the impression I gathered from your comment, is also an example of the problems that can occur when preambles are made part of the motion.)

Edited May 17, 2021 at 09:33 PM by Atul Kapur
added parenthetical sentence