BOARD-L Archives

Archiver > BOARD > 2003-10 > 1065923137


From: "Shari Handley" <>
Subject: RE: [BOARD-L] Moving On
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 21:46:01 -0400
In-Reply-To: <3F887D13.943A25C@earthlink.net>


"Recording the name of the person who seconded a motion" is actually
listed in Sturgis as among the most common *errors* secretaries make in
keeping minutes! So, no, the minutes should not list the seconds to the
motions. <g>

Probably because she felt she had a "personal interest in the outcome"
of 03-18, Pam abstained. This was within her rights, and so I think she
was correctly listed in the abstention category.

Shari

-----Original Message-----
From: Bosque Lover [mailto:]
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2003 5:59 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] Moving On


> In the mean time, I'll call your attention to the September Minutes
posted
> at http://www.usgenweb.com/official/03-09minutes.htm

Are the "seconds" to a motion not supposed to be listed too?

Also on motion 03-18, it says "Those abstaining: Pam Reid"
Pam couldn't vote on that, so wondered if that's the way this should be
listed.
I dont' know, just asking <g>

Bettie <><
--
A Cheerful Heart is Good Medicine...
--
All outgoing mail virus free, scanned by Norton 2002,
http://www.symantec.com/




==== BOARD Mailing List ====
Archives for Board-L are located at:
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/board


This thread: