|
Grex > Coop9 > #49: 12/18/96 Meeting Minute Memories | |
|
| Author |
Message |
ajax
|
|
12/18/96 Meeting Minute Memories
| 
Feb 3 14:13 UTC 1997 |
The hand-written meeting minutes for the 12/18/96 board meeting were
lost, so I'm entering this item for people to enter their collective
recollections of what was discussed, and what motions were passed, at
the meeting. Once we get enough recollections, we could combine them
into "official" meeting minutes.
|
| 52 responses total. |
ajax
|
|
response 1 of 52:
|
Feb 3 14:14 UTC 1997 |
A motion was passed authorizing staff purchase of a Sun 4/400 card
and 4/400 128MB memory card for up to $1100, when such equipment was
found.
A motion was passed authorizing $500 (I think) for silk-screen
T-shirt printing. (We have orders for about half that already).
I think someone was added to staff. Can't remember for sure who
was in attendance...I think all the board, and Jan and STeve, and I
got there part-way through, among others.
|
scott
|
|
response 2 of 52:
|
Feb 3 15:35 UTC 1997 |
dang was added to staff, and I think arthurp was added as cfadm.
|
richard
|
|
response 3 of 52:
|
Feb 3 16:02 UTC 1997 |
They lie! They lie! The minutes of that meeting were lost on purpose because
the board was plotting to loot grex's bank account and use the money to buy
seven airline tickets to Hawaii! But hey, they all came to their senses, it
was just temporary insanity because the meeting went so long and it was so
cold that night. Apparently, these things happen in Michigani n the dead
of winter! :)
|
tsty
|
|
response 4 of 52:
|
Feb 3 17:19 UTC 1997 |
cfadm ? i thought the *january* meeting referred cfadm to staff?
|
ajax
|
|
response 5 of 52:
|
Feb 3 22:15 UTC 1997 |
Yep, I think TS is right.
Re 3, I think that was actually the meeting where Mark Conger
mentioned he may be leaving for a couple months.
There was also some discussion over the reasons for recent crashes,
and the inconclusive results of swapping CPU and memory cards.
|
scott
|
|
response 6 of 52:
|
Feb 4 00:48 UTC 1997 |
(Geez, where did I cget that from?)
|
tsty
|
|
response 7 of 52:
|
Feb 4 04:10 UTC 1997 |
<<from cbreak?>>
|
mary
|
|
response 8 of 52:
|
Feb 5 00:06 UTC 1997 |
Regarding any meeting minutes that are simply never posted - I
think those meeting should be treated as if they didn't
have quorum and no official business took place. If the Board
can't remember who was there and what was voted on and
how the vote came out then it didn't happen. Any business
must be reported to the membership to be official, I'd think.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 9 of 52:
|
Feb 5 00:36 UTC 1997 |
It is a philosophical question, I think. Or is it psychological?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 10 of 52:
|
Feb 5 06:41 UTC 1997 |
The meeting was announced and took place. The minutes need only state that
the meeting was convened and adjourned. That is important for the purpose of
meeting the meeting frequency bylaw. I think *attendance* could be included,
as those that went should know they were there. The minutes do not become
*official* until they are subsequently accepte, at which time the record
is made formal, even if not accurate. [RRO provides that actions that took
place but with an error - like a motion not being seconded - are still
valid if the error is not noticed and the motion is not reconsidered in
the same meeting. This is the sense in which an error in minutes is
acceptable, since the minutes can be amended before being accepted.]
|
valerie
|
|
response 11 of 52:
|
Feb 5 13:17 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
valerie
|
|
response 12 of 52:
|
Feb 5 13:28 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
srw
|
|
response 13 of 52:
|
Feb 6 01:36 UTC 1997 |
This all seems pretty accurate to me so far. At least there's nothing you
posted in #12 that I think is incorrect. We definitely did allocate money for
the new equipment. I remember that for certain. Rob Argy's amounts seem
correct to me, but I was uncertain that this was the meeting for that.
Further pondering of this question leads me to believe that it had to have
been.
|
scg
|
|
response 14 of 52:
|
Feb 6 04:49 UTC 1997 |
We allocated some amount of money (I can't remember how much) for buying a
Sun 4/400. Rob mentioned the machine at property disposition, but at the time
we didn't think it was worth buying. All that changed later, of course.
|
ajax
|
|
response 15 of 52:
|
Feb 6 06:27 UTC 1997 |
I'm sure that was the meeting where the machine purchase was
discussed, and $1100 was the amount allocated for a 4/400 board
and 128MB memory card. The 4/370 (mentioned in response #12's 5b)
was discussed, but no decision had been made to purchase at that
point. I recently gave the receipt to Mark, and I recall that as
January 3 or so, after Property Disposition reopened after the
holidays.
|
valerie
|
|
response 16 of 52:
|
Feb 6 14:26 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
aruba
|
|
response 17 of 52:
|
Feb 6 14:46 UTC 1997 |
Re #15: It was January 2nd, according to the receipt.
|
dang
|
|
response 18 of 52:
|
Feb 6 17:21 UTC 1997 |
Dang (me) was added to staff. At least, so I'm told. :)
|
dpc
|
|
response 19 of 52:
|
Feb 6 22:20 UTC 1997 |
Contemporaneous notes are not necessary to establish what happened
at a meeting; recollections (like the ones being put together)
are enough.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 20 of 52:
|
Feb 7 06:37 UTC 1997 |
Not legally. That requires that the minutes be later *accepted* by the board.
(I'm not really following you around, David....)
|
davel
|
|
response 21 of 52:
|
Feb 7 11:12 UTC 1997 |
Um, Rane, "legally" how? Or are you now giving RRO force of law?
|
kaplan
|
|
response 22 of 52:
|
Feb 7 17:39 UTC 1997 |
Re #14 and #15 and #1, resp #0 of item 30 confirms the figure of $1100 for
a sun4/400 and it was posted close to the time of the meeting.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 23 of 52:
|
Feb 7 20:03 UTC 1997 |
Legally, as in state law. RRO are internal rules. The point is, motions
adopted by the board of a corporation must be in accord with state law,
the articles and the bylaws. However no motions adopted by a board have
any legal standing until the minutes are accepted. For example, a contract
entered into by a board is in limbo until the minutes of that meeting are
accepted. Most organizations act immediately upon board action, *assuming*
the minutes will be accepted (there being no reason to not to, if the
motion is clear and the vote is recorded). However, in this case, the
events of the meeting are unclear, so they are in limbo, but for a
different reason. When they ar reconstructed, whether accurately or not,
they are just as much in limbo until the board *accepts* them - at which
point whatever the minutes say becomes the legal action of the board.
|
dpc
|
|
response 24 of 52:
|
Feb 8 02:32 UTC 1997 |
You are legally incorrect, rcurl. Once a resolution is passed, it
becomes the action of the corporation, and no delay is needed until
the minutes of the meeting are adopted at the next meeting. Think it
through. Then, if you have any "legal" citation for your argument,
please post it here.
|