Guest navan Posted September 15, 2010 at 12:24 PM Report Share Posted September 15, 2010 at 12:24 PM During a contentious meeting, the majority of members move to have the minutes from the last meeting be read verbatim at the next meeting so that (as one member put it) "the demeanor of the members present would be known to all who read it." The bylaws clearly state that Robert's Rules of order be followed. The President has refused to amend the minutes. Is he correct? If the same minutes are read again at the next meeting and not approved by the members, what happens next? Can the meeting continue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdave Posted September 15, 2010 at 01:09 PM Report Share Posted September 15, 2010 at 01:09 PM During a contentious meeting, the majority of members move to have the minutes from the last meeting be read verbatim at the next meeting so that (as one member put it) "the demeanor of the members present would be known to all who read it." The bylaws clearly state that Robert's Rules of order be followed. The President has refused to amend the minutes. Is he correct? If the same minutes are read again at the next meeting and not approved by the members, what happens next? Can the meeting continue?1. The minutes should be read verbatim but should contain nothing about "the demeanor of the members present".2. The President can not amend the minutes - the assembly can only correct the minutes.3. The meeting can continue without the approval of the minutes (from 2 meetings ago?) but it's a pretty safe bet that this will be another "contentious meeting"!I'm not sure how much of this is in RONR in Brief - but I would strongly suggest that this president AND seceratary read pg. 451 - 458 in The Book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Cisar Posted September 15, 2010 at 01:19 PM Report Share Posted September 15, 2010 at 01:19 PM The majority decides what is in the minutes and what is not, not the president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Posted September 15, 2010 at 04:47 PM Report Share Posted September 15, 2010 at 04:47 PM The majority decides what is in the minutes and what is not, not the president.Also Larry,Would it be correct to state that RONR says that the minutes should reflect what was done, not what was "said"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted September 15, 2010 at 04:53 PM Report Share Posted September 15, 2010 at 04:53 PM Also Larry,Would it be correct to state that RONR says that the minutes should reflect what was done, not what was "said"?Since it's 2AM or so where Larry lives, I'm sure he'd say "absolutely", if he were awake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted September 15, 2010 at 06:40 PM Report Share Posted September 15, 2010 at 06:40 PM During a contentious meeting, the majority of members move to have the minutes from the last meeting be read verbatim at the next meeting so that (as one member put it) "the demeanor of the members present would be known to all who read it." The bylaws clearly state that Robert's Rules of order be followed. The President has refused to amend the minutes. Is he correct? If the same minutes are read again at the next meeting and not approved by the members, what happens next? Can the meeting continue?This motion is out of order, since it infringes on the freedom of the next meeting--in effect, it forces what amounts to a special rule of order on the future session without actually adopting one.The only way not to approve the draft of minutes presented by the secretary is to approve some corrected version, instead. It is not proper to "not approve" the minutes; and, the question on the approval of the minutes is not put to a vote, but is a special case of transacting business by unanimous consent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest navan Posted September 16, 2010 at 06:05 PM Report Share Posted September 16, 2010 at 06:05 PM Also Larry,Would it be correct to state that RONR says that the minutes should reflect what was done, not what was "said"?The RONR that I have clearly says business done and not what was said.This motion is out of order, since it infringes on the freedom of the next meeting--in effect, it forces what amounts to a special rule of order on the future session without actually adopting one.The only way not to approve the draft of minutes presented by the secretary is to approve some corrected version, instead. It is not proper to "not approve" the minutes; and, the question on the approval of the minutes is not put to a vote, but is a special case of transacting business by unanimous consent.So the members were wrong in requesting verbatim minutes? They can only ask to have the minutes corrected? And they cannot impose rules on the following meeting so the reading of the verbatim minutes would effect the following meeting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted September 16, 2010 at 06:10 PM Report Share Posted September 16, 2010 at 06:10 PM So the members were wrong in requesting verbatim minutes? They can only ask to have the minutes corrected? And they cannot impose rules on the following meeting so the reading of the verbatim minutes would effect the following meeting?It's not clear what you (or they) mean by "verbatim minutes". If you mean the minutes in their entirety, that's fine. But if you mean everything that was said at the meeting, word for word (i.e. verbatim), that's not what the minutes should contain.So if the minutes are done right the first time, there will be nothing extra for anyone to complain about.But the minutes of past meetings have absolutely no effect on future meetings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.