Guest susie Posted January 12, 2011 at 06:27 PM Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 at 06:27 PM Minutes of the meeting are in dispute.How long can they go "unapproved"? How long can they be "dispensed"?RONR says that they must be read before the minutes of the later meeting are read. So I am thinking this means they have to be approved at the very next meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 12, 2011 at 07:10 PM Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 at 07:10 PM Yes, must be done at the next meeting, but if your "dispute" isn't resolved, you can keep on postponing approval to the next next meeting. But try (hard) to take care of all this before folks forget what happened.See p. 456, 457.Tell us more about the nature of the "dispute" -- I'll bet that it is over something that RONR says shouldn't even be in the minutes in the first place, like who said what in debate. See p. 451 ff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted January 12, 2011 at 07:27 PM Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 at 07:27 PM I agree with John, that if everything that was "said" was stricken from the minutes, it would take about 30 seconds to approve them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted January 12, 2011 at 09:28 PM Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 at 09:28 PM Minutes of the meeting are in dispute.How long can they go "unapproved"? How long can they be "dispensed"?RONR says that they must be read before the minutes of the later meeting are read. So I am thinking this means they have to be approved at the very next meeting.I'm wondering why the dispute is continuing. If there's a dispute, someone should put the correct (in his view) language in the form of a motion and take a vote on it. How long does it take to vote?You MUST approve them; you have no choice on that. The only thing in question is what they should say. What happened at the meeting is not normally in dispute, but if it is, it's a majority decision. As others have pointed out, if there's something truly controversial it's almost a sure bet that it probably is something that does not belong in minutes in the first place. How can the exact wording of a motion that was presumably copied down verbatim at the time suddenly become a matter of controversy? Unless it's something that is required to be in the minutes, just strike it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert B Fish Posted January 12, 2011 at 10:21 PM Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 at 10:21 PM Minutes of the meeting are in dispute.How long can they go "unapproved"? How long can they be "dispensed"?RONR says that they must be read before the minutes of the later meeting are read. So I am thinking this means they have to be approved at the very next meeting.Unfortunately, your problem is not too uncommon. It begins with a secretary who tries to summarize the essence of the debate in the minutes. You already know from this post that's not recommended by RONR but too many organizations do so anyhow. Then someone doesn't like the way they were summarized and won't turn loose of the issue. (The other frequent reason could be that they don't like what was DONE at the meeting and feel that not approving the minutes will address that. It won't and the chairman should declare that debate to be out of order since it's addressing a motion was is not properly before the assembly. If you REALLY need to communicate what was SAID at the meeting, get a newsletter editor.)Take a look at the sample minutes on page 454-455. -Bobp.s. Although RONR recommends that minutes be approved by a committee for organizations that meet less frequently than quarterly, there is no reason why they cannot be approved by a committee if the organization meets, say, monthly. Then you can have the concise, approved minutes posted on your website and avoid all this because a 2/3 vote will now be required to amend the approved minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jerri Posted January 12, 2011 at 11:11 PM Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 at 11:11 PM I just attended a neighborhood organization meeting earlier in the week where this was a big issue. A person claimed that the motion in the minutes was not the motion she made. Problem was that she could not state exactly what her motion was - just that it wasn't what was in the minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 13, 2011 at 05:37 AM Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 at 05:37 AM How can the exact wording of a motion that was presumably copied down verbatim at the time suddenly become a matter of controversy?Well, and that gets at the other common reason for disputes over the content of the minutes - failing to require that a lengthy motion be presented in writing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.