quorum stated in minutes

[Guest Sara]

Do the minutes need to state "a quorum was present". If there wasn't a quorum, the meeting would not have proceeded. RONR seems silent on this and various minutes I have read vary on this.

Thank you.

[Rev Ed]

Yes. For a Board or Committee meeting, that is easy: The meetings should state who was and was not present. If more members were present then were not, quorom is a given. For meetings of the general membership, especially for an organization with no fixed membership level (i.e. the number of members may change from year to to year), the Minutes should come with a statement that ___ members were present, which represented quorom (or did not meet quorom.)

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Yes.

No. That is not The Book.

See the sample minutes on page 454. There is no reference to the quorum being present.

For a Board or Committee meeting, that is easy: The meetings should state who was and was not present.

No. That is not The Book.

See the sample minutes on page 454. There is no reference to the roll call being called or a sign-in sheet being presented.

...the Minutes should come with a statement that ___ members were present, which represented quorom (or did not meet quorom.)

No. That is not The Book.

If you are going to give an opinion, or a suggestion, then please make it clear that your answer is your way of doing things.

Do not imply that your answer is based on Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (RONR 10th ed.)

[Mr. J!]

The model form for minutes found in RONR, starting on page 454, do not mention that a quorum was present. It is assumed.

If the meeting did not have a quorum, that should be said (and the minutes will likely be quite short).

[Rev Ed]

No. That is not The Book.

See the sample minutes on page 454. There is no reference to the quorum being present.

No. That is not The Book.

See the sample minutes on page 454. There is no reference to the roll call being called or a sign-in sheet being presented.

No. That is not The Book.

If you are going to give an opinion, or a suggestion, then please make it clear that your answer is your way of doing things.

Do not imply that your answer is based on Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (RONR 10th ed.)

Kim, I am sorry that I made an error - the sample Minutes in RONR do state that the President and Secretary are there (I have now double checked that.) I was providing my response based on Minutes that I have seen from various organizations. I also remembered that there was mention of people being present in RONR, but not the exact details.

I am not giving my own opinion, but what appears to be common practise. I did not have a copy of RONR handy to double check my answer at the time, so I went by the standard practise that I am aware of.

While it is perfectly legit to not specifically mention if quorom was met, a simple statement to that effect is really no big deal. It is not going to hurt anyone, and RONR does allow for, this type of situation. As such, my response should, and now is, as follows:

No, the Minutes do not need to reflect that quorom was present. However, the organization is free to set its own policy on the issue, and may create its own policy to allow for the mentioning of quorom.

P.S. Just because RONR's sample Minutes do not contain a statement whether quorom was met, does not mean the those sample Minutes (just like its sample By-laws) are set in stone. The sample Minutes are a great guideline though.

[hmtcastle]

As such, my response should, and now is, as follows:

No, the Minutes do not need to reflect that quorom was present. However, the organization is free to set its own policy on the issue, and may create its own policy to allow for the mentioning of quorom.

And, while you're at it, you might as well spell "quorum" correctly.

[Rev Ed]

Yep, another mistake. This is not my week.