Minutes, Contents

[New Secretary]

The Secretary of our 3-person condo Executive Board includes much editorial comment in his meeting minutes, to the point where they are never accepted by the Board. I eard in RONR that unless the minutes are to be "Published", they should only include the wording of what is voted upon, and the vote. What is meant by "published" minutes?

[Gary Novosielski]

The Secretary of our 3-person condo Executive Board includes much editorial comment in his meeting minutes, to the point where they are never accepted by the Board. I eard in RONR that unless the minutes are to be "Published", they should only include the wording of what is voted upon, and the vote. What is meant by "published" minutes?

That's a good question with a complex answer. You can be confident that the minutes of condo boards are not "published".

The board can't just "never accept" the minutes, but they can correct them by eliminating all of the editorial comment. At some point the secretary will presumably realize he is wasting his time.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

The Secretary ... includes much editorial comment in his meeting minutes, to the point where they are never accepted by the Board.

I heard in RONR that unless the minutes are to be "Published", they should only include the wording of what is voted upon, and the vote.

What is meant by "published" minutes?

For an example, see the "Congressional Record."

See also scientific conferences, where papers are presented, and where colloquia are conducted.

• If control is lost over the minutes by way of anonymous distribution (see above), then they should be considered "published".

• If control is maintained, and the only eyes who see the minutes are members of the organization, then those minutes are not (yet) published.

I think the consensus among parliamentarians is, a web site posting is NOT considered "publishing".

In my opinion:

Peeking by unauthorized eyes is not the key.

Widespread non-member access is the key.

[Josh Martin]

What is meant by "published" minutes?

In RONR, "published" generally refers to when professional, educational, or theological societies record their proceedings in full for publication in bound volumes, to be available to the general public.

[New Secretary]

That's a good question with a complex answer. You can be confident that the minutes of condo boards are not "published".

The board can't just "never accept" the minutes, but they can correct them by eliminating all of the editorial comment. At some point the secretary will presumably realize he is wasting his time.

I am new to our 3-person condo Executive Board. (My first/probably last condo) Nine-unit Association of small, mostly seasonal beach-area complex, 2nd home-type units. They have apparently, in 20+ years, made it all up as they have gone along. I am trying, with little luck, to get them to follow our Bylaws and RONR. Unless I can find a second Board Member willing to take matters seriously........ But 3 owners/past Presidents, and the sitting President, have all indicated to me that the Bylaws and RONR are not appropriate for / do not apply to, an Association such as ours. Very difficult. They were so happy that someone agreed to get on the Board--They made me the Treasurer the day after we purchased our unit--notwithstanding that the Board should be organizing itself, but . . . you get the picture. Now I am beginning to be looked at as the problem Thank you for all help and input, both past and future.

[Josh Martin]

But 3 owners/past Presidents, and the sitting President, have all indicated to me that the Bylaws and RONR are not appropriate for / do not apply to, an Association such as ours.

The suggestion that an association's Bylaws do not apply to the association is simply ridiculous. RONR applies to the association if it has been adopted as the Association's parliamentary authority, preferably by incorporation into the Bylaws. Whether the Bylaws or RONR are appropriate for the association is up to the society to determine, but if it is believed they are inappropriate ignoring them is not the answer. If it is believed the Bylaws are inappropriate the solution is to amend them. If it is believed RONR is inappropriate the solution is to adopt special rules of order and/or adopt an entirely different parliamentary authority (or none at all, which I would not advise), depending on exactly how inappropriate it is believed to be.

[New Secretary]

The suggestion that an association's Bylaws do not apply to the association is simply ridiculous. RONR applies to the association if it has been adopted as the Association's parliamentary authority, preferably by incorporation into the Bylaws. Whether the Bylaws or RONR are appropriate for the association is up to the society to determine, but if it is believed they are inappropriate ignoring them is not the answer. If it is believed the Bylaws are inappropriate the solution is to amend them. If it is believed RONR is inappropriate the solution is to adopt special rules of order and/or adopt an entirely different parliamentary authority (or none at all, which I would not advise), depending on exactly how inappropriate it is believed to be.

The Bylaws call for meeting procedures of both the Association and the 3-person Executive Board to be governed by the latest edition of Roberts Rules, "when not in conflict", etc.. As to the EB, under "Organization", it is indicated that "Board meetings may be held under reasonable rules consistent with the(se) Bylaws as the EB may determine." The Board is "entitled to promulgate" such rules. Under "Conduct of Meetings", Bylaws indicate that "Roberts Rules shall govern . . ." And, yes, I too believe the attitudes of these folks is ridiculous, and I have come about as close to saying so as I can without heavy insult.

The problem is that we have 9 units, owned by 6 married couple co-owners, 2 single persons, and one owned by only 1 spouse of a married couple. Total, thus, of only 15 persons to choose from--a very limited gene pool. I have yet to find a second person who believes much of this is important. Five of the nine units (encompassing 8 of the 15 persons) have been there from the beginning, 1988, have served on the Board in the past, think it is now somebody else's turn, and think that "we don't need no stinkin' Rules." One person, another fairly recent buyer, is beginning to see the need for proper procedures, and indicates he will come to the Board, but we will have no vacancy for another 11 months, and I am concerned about personal legal liability. (They will not agree to have our books audited or reviewed, as required.) If we only had a second person on the Board to help lead, we could get on the right track.

Not sure I can tough it out, but if I resign, I am afraid the bills may not be paid....