Treasurer report

[farmersdaughter]

According to RRO we are not to except the treasures report. However it has been a long time practice of the membership to do so. My question is ; if a treasurers report was excepted and now a few members want to question how / why the board spent funds , should this be an issue? The members in question were at the meeting where the treasurers report was read and did not voice a concern at that time. The member are trying to say the board has miss handle funds. I guess what I am asking is ; Whenever a report is excepted be it , treasurer , sec , recreational committee or audit committee the membership is saying ok ? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

To accept (not "except") a report is to say, "This report is our report; its words are our words; it is an official statement which the organization stands behind."

That is why a treasurer's report is not be to accepted. It is not yet audited, and should not be automatically rubber stamped as the final numbers (official data) of the organization.

That is not to say, once a report (of any kind) is officially made the statement of the organization, that members cannot question its contents, its veracity, its accuracy, its relevance.

There is a difference between saying:

(a.) this report is the official statement of the organization;

(b.) this report shows that we erred; that we overspent; that we wasted piles of money.

Indeed, an accurate report might indeed imply, "We now know officially know that we don't know what we are doing with our own money."

[Josh Martin]

My question is ; if a treasurers report was excepted and now a few members want to question how / why the board spent funds , should this be an issue?

No, it shouldn't be an issue. Accepting a treasurer's report does not imply that the assembly agrees that the board spent the funds wisely - it only means that the assembly agrees that the report is an accurate accounting of the assembly's funds.

Whenever a report is excepted be it , treasurer , sec , recreational committee or audit committee the membership is saying ok ? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

If the assembly accepts the report of the treasurer or audit committee it is accepting that it is an accurate accounting. This is why only the annual treasurer's report should be accepted, and only after being audited.

If the assembly accepts the report of the Recreational Committee then the membership is saying it agrees with everything the Recreational Committee said in the report and is making it the official statement of the organization.

I would imagine the secretary's report is generally for information only so I doubt accepting it would have any substantial effect.

In any event, I hope you see now why the assembly should immediately put a halt to this business of accepting every report that comes before it. If the intent is to simply place the report on file, no motion is required for this - the secretary should do it automatically. Otherwise, only accept the Treasurer's report annually, and only after an audit is completed, and only accept other reports if the assembly truly intends to endorse every word of the report.

[hmtcastle]

Otherwise, only accept the Treasurer's report annually, and only after an audit is completed . . .

Though it's my understanding that (per p.461) it's the auditor's report, and not the treasurer's annual report, that is accepted.

[Rob Elsman]

There may be some confusion about what it means to accept an officer's or committee's report. Take a look at RONR (10th ed.), pp. 490, 491.

[Josh Martin]

Though it's my understanding that (per p.461) it's the auditor's report, and not the treasurer's annual report, that is accepted.

Yes, your understanding is correct. I should have said that the annual treasurer's report is submitted for audit and the auditor's report is accepted.