Review of minutes

[Guest Tammy]

Our non profit board is having discussion over the "proper" way to review minutes from the previous meeting for approval. About one third of the members want minutes emailed out to all directors in the day after the meeting, one third want them emailed out about 48 before the next scheduled meeting and one third want them only in hard copy form at the meeting to review before the vote on approval. Any help would be appreciated.

[hmtcastle]

Our non profit board is having discussion over the "proper" way to review minutes from the previous meeting for approval. About one third of the members want minutes emailed out to all directors in the day after the meeting, one third want them emailed out about 48 before the next scheduled meeting and one third want them only in hard copy form at the meeting to review before the vote on approval. Any help would be appreciated.

Well, if two of those thirds can agree, they can establish a policy. But nothing in RONR requires the secretary to submit a draft of the minutes to anyone before it's submitted for approval at the next meeting.

FWIW, requiring the minutes the day after the meeting is a good way to find yourselves looking for another secretary. But, of course, it depends on the nature of your board.

[Josh Martin]

Our non profit board is having discussion over the "proper" way to review minutes from the previous meeting for approval. About one third of the members want minutes emailed out to all directors in the day after the meeting, one third want them emailed out about 48 before the next scheduled meeting and one third want them only in hard copy form at the meeting to review before the vote on approval. Any help would be appreciated.

I would suggest that one of the members make a motion to do it whichever way they prefer. The motion can then be perfected through amendment. Hopefully the board can reach some sort of compromise. Majority vote rules. It seems to me the most likely outcome of this process is the 24-hour option, as this would presumably be the second choice of the members who want 48 hours.

In the absence of any rule to the contrary, the Secretary is only required to bring the minutes to the meeting and read to the board. No advance submission or extra copies of any sort are required.

Well, if two of those thirds can agree, they can establish a policy.

This seems to be in the nature of a standing rule. I believe a majority vote would suffice.

[hmtcastle]

This seems to be in the nature of a standing rule. I believe a majority vote would suffice.

Yes. I wasn't suggesting a two-thirds vote was needed, only that if some of the members joined forces, they would prevail.

[Trina]

I would suggest that one of the members make a motion to do it whichever way they prefer. The motion can then be perfected through amendment. Hopefully the board can reach some sort of compromise. Majority vote rules. It seems to me the most likely outcome of this process is the 24-hour option, as this would presumably be the second choice of the members who want 48 hours.

...

Actually, the 48 hour people wanted the minutes 48 hours before the next meeting, if I understood the OP. I'm not finding fault with the process you suggest, just cringing a bit at the idea of 24-hour turnaround as a 'compromise' solution .

...

FWIW, requiring the minutes the day after the meeting is a good way to find yourselves looking for another secretary. But, of course, it depends on the nature of your board.

As a secretary for a couple of organizations myself, I agree. However, as you say, the secretary of Tammy's nonprofit board might not have a problem with it. Presumably the secretary can point out potential problems during debate on the motion to set a policy regarding when/how members are to be presented with draft minutes.

edited to add:

In practice, I've noticed that when people get the draft minutes at the meeting, or a few days before the meeting, they will actually remember what they read, and offer corrections.

On the other hand, I've noticed that distribution weeks before the meeting leads to the phenomenon of the minutes being approved without much consideration -- the members remember that they got something by e-mail a few weeks ago, don't really remember the details, but also don't want to take up meeting time by reading the draft minutes again to refresh their memories. So, the minutes may get approved without adequate (IMO) scrutiny. Doesn't have to be that way, of course -- maybe the members of Tammy's board will all conscientiously re-read that aging e-mail in their Inboxes as they get ready to go to their next meeting .

[Robert B Fish]

The root problem with getting minutes issued promptly is a long standing practice at the organization of habitually having excessive extraneous material in the minutes. The minutes should mainly contain a record of what was DONE at the meeting and not what was said by the members. For most organizations, the minutes could easily be half as long as they currently are...or less.

Organizations who feel lengthy minutes are needed to keep others informed of what's happening at the board meetings should get a newsletter editor instead. If their minutes - the only official, reviewed and approved record - are ever the subject of a legal discovery, they will be thankful for following the advice in RONR.

-Bob

[Josh Martin]

Actually, the 48 hour people wanted the minutes 48 hours before the next meeting, if I understood the OP. I'm not finding fault with the process you suggest, just cringing a bit at the idea of 24-hour turnaround as a 'compromise' solution .

It seems I didn't read the original post carefully enough. I apparently read the word "before" rather than "after" in the phrase "the day after the meeting." Given this information, the 48-hour option seems more likely to be the compromise solution.

[tctheatc]

FWIW, I can't believe people are even divided over this! If the minutes are out the next day, why wouldn't that satisfy everybody? If someone doesn't want to see them until 48 hrs before the meeting or even at the meeting, file them away and take them out and read them whenever you want! Sheesh! No pleasing some folks, I guess. ;-)

When I was secretary for a certain church's administrative board, I liked to get the minutes done asap after the meeting, simply because it was one less thing to do later. The point that some want them early while discussions are fresh in the mind (meaning there's too much "so-and-so said.." in the minutes) is well taken, but if that's an issue in a particular group, getting them out early WITHOUT all that extraneous discussion in them could be a good way to educate the group that that stuff doesn't belong, rather than having them think the secretary forgot all their witty banter in the month it took to do the minutes.

[Gary Novosielski]

FWIW, I can't believe people are even divided over this! If the minutes are out the next day, why wouldn't that satisfy everybody?

I suspect it might satisfy everybody except the secretary.

I think it's unreasonable to expect a secretary (who may possibly have a life) to turn the minutes around in 24 hours.

RONR only expects the secretary to have the minutes ready for the next meeting.

[Trina]

...

I think it's unreasonable to expect a secretary (who may possibly have a life) to turn the minutes around in 24 hours.

...

Amen.

[Josh Martin]

FWIW, I can't believe people are even divided over this! If the minutes are out the next day, why wouldn't that satisfy everybody? If someone doesn't want to see them until 48 hrs before the meeting or even at the meeting, file them away and take them out and read them whenever you want! Sheesh! No pleasing some folks, I guess. ;-)

When I was secretary for a certain church's administrative board, I liked to get the minutes done asap after the meeting, simply because it was one less thing to do later.

It may or may not be reasonable for a particular assembly to expect the Secretary to have the minutes within 24 hours, depending on the bulk of business the assembly conducts at its meetings, the amount of extraneous material the assembly requires in its minutes by rule or custom, and the other responsibilities of the Secretary within that timeframe (both in and out of the assembly). The assembly itself will have to be the judge of this, preferably with at least some input from the Secretary.

The point that some want them early while discussions are fresh in the mind (meaning there's too much "so-and-so said.." in the minutes) is well taken, but if that's an issue in a particular group, getting them out early WITHOUT all that extraneous discussion in them could be a good way to educate the group that that stuff doesn't belong, rather than having them think the secretary forgot all their witty banter in the month it took to do the minutes.

Well, it might be, or it might be a good way to get fired. I think it would be wiser for the Secretary to prepare the "pared-down" version of the minutes in addition to the usual version, so that the Secretary has a back-up plan in case the assembly doesn't approve of the change.