Meeting Notes

[Mick-e]

Thanks for sending me the meeting notes.
As of 11:17am I've received 4 copies of the same email.
1 was enough.
I wonder how many I'll get before the day is done.

 

[thedub]

I just got one. And it was appreciated; Thanks Connie.

 

[synfinatic]

Someone having a bad day?

I got four copies too, no biggie, email is easy to delete.

Thanks Connie! :thumbup

 

[Corey]

I haven't received a copy of the meeting notes yet.

Mickey, could you forward them to my e-mail? PM/text me if you don't have it. Thank you.

 

[Mick-e]

I haven't received a copy of the meeting notes yet.

Mickey, could you forward them to my e-mail? PM/text me if you don't have it. Thank you.

Sent

 

[Corey]

Received. Thanks you Mickey! :thumbup

 

[Corey]

So has anyone received the email blast with the meeting notes yet? Don't send me a copy now as Mickey sent them to me. Who is on the list?

 

[synfinatic]

The meeting minutes are generally almost a month behind because they need to be approved/voted on by the BoD before they are sent out. If you didn't get a copy last month, ask Connie.

 

[Corey]

When did the meeting minutes start taking a month to be sent out? This wasn't the case last year or the year before. Why would they take more than a week or two, to be approved or voted on if someone can sit in on these meetings?

Here is an idea, if AFM can live stream the races, why can't we live stream the monthly meetings for those that can't attend to at least listen to? If any AFM member can just show up and sit in on a meeting, live streaming would be for those that can't make it.

 

[#1 tuner]

Why do they need approved at all? The meeting is held in a public forum. Anyone who attended could report what they observed and the board could do nothing about it. When is the last time a typewriter was used to make these notes? Hasn't a COMPUTER been used for some time now? 1970 called and it want's this dinosaur of a process back. :afm199

 

[synfinatic]

Corey: I'm just going from memory over the past few years. Usually it seemed to take 3+ weeks from what I can remember. Hell, I remember times when they'd be published after the next meeting or not at all. It would be easy to read the old AFM forums and look at the archive to get the actual dates rather then trusting our memories, but the BoD decided to turn off the forums recently. That said, I'd have to say Connie has done a better job then most.

Billy: They have to be approved because that's how companies, non-profits, etc work. The secretary takes notes and then submits them to the BoD after the meeting for them to approve of their accuracy. They're not going to post un-approved meeting minutes.

Personally, I think it's a great step that the AFM is e-mailing them out for everyone to read. I hope some day the AFM will do audio recordings of the meetings and make those available to the membership as well since meeting minutes generally have only very high level information in them.

 

[Holeshot]

Aaron is NOT a bod member, but damn if he doesn't have the answers as if he was. Well, well said Aaron. Good stuff.

There's a significant difference in meeting minutes VS a record of the entire meeting. Minutes are the minimum standard required to record our actions as a board, but the corporate (and non-profit) codes of CA.

 

[#1 tuner]

So if I read this right, minutes are kept to satisfy a code for tax exempt status. Are they submitted to some agency as well? I ask because it seems to be a drug out process, for accuracy? A live stream would make this null and void if not. Then it would feel like we were attending a meeting without all the driving involved.

 

[Corey]

Any member can attend the meetings and listen to what is discussed, so live streaming should be in the plan.

 

[MellowYellow]

just going to point out that just because it is done one way for years does not mean we can't change the process. It seems to me if you get the information out to the members in a timely fashion they then have the responsibility to then be more involved. One reason people don't get involved is because the amount of hurdles they have to jump through. Make smaller and less hurdles the members I am sure would be happy

 

[#1 tuner]

just going to point out that just because it is done one way for years does not mean we can't change the process. It seems to me if you get the information out to the members in a timely fashion they then have the responsibility to then be more involved. One reason people don't get involved is because the amount of hurdles they have to jump through. Make smaller and less hurdles the members I am sure would be happy

This.

 

[synfinatic]

just going to point out that just because it is done one way for years does not mean we can't change the process. It seems to me if you get the information out to the members in a timely fashion they then have the responsibility to then be more involved. One reason people don't get involved is because the amount of hurdles they have to jump through. Make smaller and less hurdles the members I am sure would be happy

I agree with the general premise 100%. I don't think that the meeting minutes are the way to do it though. Minutes pretty much just track the balance sheet and what was voted on and the results. While that's important information, it's not enough to be really informed.

Personally, I'd like to see the audio from the BoD meetings made available to people who can't make it in person. Streaming would be ideal, but due to the crappy Internet connection at Ricky's, I think most people would be ok with a few days worth of tape delay- especially if that meant we could clean up the audio a little.

Also would be really nice if the agenda was made available prior to the meeting... that way people could show up if a topic really interested them or at least email/call a BoD member before a vote is taken.

 

[Corey]

Didn't we use to get a pre-meeting e-mail?

 

[synfinatic]

The agenda used to be posted on the AFM Forums.

 

[afm199]

So if I read this right, minutes are kept to satisfy a code for tax exempt status. Are they submitted to some agency as well? I ask because it seems to be a drug out process, for accuracy? A live stream would make this null and void if not. Then it would feel like we were attending a meeting without all the driving involved.

They are kept to satisfy Ca corporation laws, exempt or not. They do not have to be submitted, but must be kept available. The reason they must be approved is that the Secretary is NOT the legal entity that establishes corporate policy. They just record it. The Board has to look at the minutes and approve whether or not they reflect the actual situation as discussed. (In the event of any actionable liability, the originators of policy, the board, can be held culpable, not the secretary. It's called CYA)

I've been in too many board meetings and they all have the same format. Nothing keeps someone from going to a meeting and making notes, if it is an open meeting. But any board member or corporate officer that releases meeting information without authorization is taking a gamble.

I'm about 90% sure I wouldn't want any closed meeting broadcast or made public in any way if I was a member of the board, until the board approved the release. It's just too troublesome. A. The meetings are often rancorous and there are many misunderstandings. If they are published it creates confusion. B. If the board does not have a chance to issue approved material, then, again, misunderstanding can occur. Remember, the peeps running the AFM have legal liability and a corporate structure does NOT offer a bulletproof shield. Though it's pretty good, any officer can be sued for negligence. So it's in the interest of the officers to make sure any official business is discussed before it's released.

The first non profit I worked on did not have director's insurance. At the first board meeting I mentioned that I would be resigning unless it was purchased. They ended up buying it, sadly nobody knew it even existed.