Member wants to "Discuss" Motion Wording

[AxolotlMorph]

We had a meeting 2 days ago. I'm finished writing the minutes for the meeting but have not sent out the minutes yet for approval. A motion was stated (actually restated several times for verification so I could write it correctly), and a particular Board Member wanted the initial Board Member making the motion to change his motion, but didn't want to actually amend the motion in the end. The motion passed by majority, but it was apparent that the opposing Board Member didn't like this. Yesterday morning this member sent an email pressing the rest of the Board to rush a decision. It should be noted the opposing member is President. Later in the afternoon, the same member sent another email to myself and the Vice President stating they believed "the wording of the motion should be discussed by the Top 3" (naming the themselves, the Vice President, and myself as Executive Director).

 

Is this even possible? When it was mentioned in the meeting that the motion cannot just be changed by anyone and the person making the motion should have their motion heard, then someone could amend it, President decided to make a statement that they thought we were doing a "Relaxed Robert's Rules" (whatever that means) and then never amended the motion, just opposed it. There are lots of other pushy things this member has been trying to get away with, and I believe was allowed to do. I've only been in my position since May, and I've had to push to be allowed to even do the things I'm doing currently because the President was given reigns for so long.

[Rob Elsman]

I am not really able to follow what is going on.  Half the "meeting" seems to be in a board meeting, and the other half seems to be by emails.  My guess is that none of the board members, including the president, are sufficiently trained in the use of proper parliamentary procedure, even in the more relaxed setting of a small board.

Does your organization have a standing committee on rules?  I recommend that most organizations of appropriate size have one.  One of the tasks of such a committee would be the constant promotion of proper parliamentary procedure through continuing education.

Have all the members of the board thoroughly studied Robert's Rules in Brief?  Does the president have at hand in meetings a copy of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (12th ed.)?

Instead of all the backroom communication by email, why don't you all just conduct your business in the meeting room, face-to-face?

[Richard Brown]

1 hour ago, AxolotlMorph said:

Later in the afternoon, the same member sent another email to myself and the Vice President stating they believed "the wording of the motion should be discussed by the Top 3" (naming the themselves, the Vice President, and myself as Executive Director).

Is this even possible?

To try to answer your question more directly, if you are the secretary, you should prepare and submit your draft minutes exactly as it was stated and passed.  Any proposed changes should be proposed at the board meeting at which the minutes are being approved. 

It is perfectly ok for other members to continue to informally discuss among themselves the adopted motion and even for them to suggest changes in the wording to you,  but you are under absolutely no  obligation to agree to those changes or to defer to their wishes.  That goes for the president as well.  You, as secretary, should prepare the minutes to the best of your ability.  Any proposed changes should be voted on by the board when the minutes are up for approval at your next meeting.

Even if your board is using the "small board  rules" of RONR, this does not change the basic manner in which which motions are adopted. Members who are unhappy with the motion as proposed should try to perfect it through amendments before it is adopted just as with the regular meeting rules of RONR.   We sometimes refer to this (and the failure to raise timely points of order) as the "you snooze, you lose" rule.  If you don't like what is being done, speak now or it may be too late to change what you want changed.

If the majority of the board refuses to change your wording of the motion, then at the next meeting or some future meeting a member may propose to amend or rescind something previously adopted, provided the motion has not been fully carried out in the meantime.  For example, it the motion was to buy a certain model of computer, once the computer is purchased it is too late to change it.  But, if the computer has not yet been purchased, the adopted  motion may be amended or even rescinded to specify a different model or to cancel the purchase altogether.

The remedy of those who don't like the motion as adopted and as recorded in your minutes need to try to convince the board that the minutes ae incorrect and to get their proposed corrections adopted when the minutes are up for approval.  You are free to ignore their suggestions and pleas in the meantime.

Finally, you should not change the minutes to reflect what some members believe "should have happened".  The minutes are a record of what DID happen, not what should have happened  or what someone  wishes had happened.

[Gary Novosielski]

1 hour ago, AxolotlMorph said:

We had a meeting 2 days ago. I'm finished writing the minutes for the meeting but have not sent out the minutes yet for approval. A motion was stated (actually restated several times for verification so I could write it correctly), and a particular Board Member wanted the initial Board Member making the motion to change his motion, but didn't want to actually amend the motion in the end. The motion passed by majority, but it was apparent that the opposing Board Member didn't like this. Yesterday morning this member sent an email pressing the rest of the Board to rush a decision. It should be noted the opposing member is President. Later in the afternoon, the same member sent another email to myself and the Vice President stating they believed "the wording of the motion should be discussed by the Top 3" (naming the themselves, the Vice President, and myself as Executive Director).

 

Is this even possible? When it was mentioned in the meeting that the motion cannot just be changed by anyone and the person making the motion should have their motion heard, then someone could amend it, President decided to make a statement that they thought we were doing a "Relaxed Robert's Rules" (whatever that means) and then never amended the motion, just opposed it. There are lots of other pushy things this member has been trying to get away with, and I believe was allowed to do. I've only been in my position since May, and I've had to push to be allowed to even do the things I'm doing currently because the President was given reigns for so long.

Your instincts are correct.  The wording of the motion in the minutes is the exact wording as stated by the chair prior to putting the question.  There is no such thing as Relaxed Robert's Rules, but there are Small Board rules that do relax procedure significantly.  They do not, however, change the fact that motions are adopted as they are stated, and are not subject to double-secret amendment by a gang of three after the fact.

The motion passed, so the time for discussion about what it should have said has passed.  The only question now is what it actually did say word for word, so that it can be properly recorded in the minutes.  It's not up to three people, it's up to those performing approval of minutes.  Nothing done at that point can change the facts, it can only record them correctly or incorrectly.

If people don't like the wording, they can use the motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted  (§35)  to change it to their liking.  Monkeying with the minutes is not an acceptable alternative.

[Atul Kapur]

26 minutes ago, Richard Brown said:

Any proposed changes should be proposed at the board meeting at which the minutes are being approved.

To be clear, you cannot change the wording of a motion that was passed by changing the minutes. If the minutes accurately record the motion as it was stated, in this case repeatedly stated, and voted upon, then they should not be changed. The minutes approval is not a way to "rewrite history". The minutes approval process is just to ensure that the minutes are accurate. I know this is what Mr. Brown meant, but the way it was worded left the possibility of misinterpretation.

 if the president does not like the motion that was passed, the president is free to try to "fix" it at a future meeting through the use of the motion amend something previously adopted, as explained in the post above.