Post by Donna Lash-Andersen on Aug 6, 2016 9:10:13 GMT -7
To all board members:
You need to know that the “Final” Minutes of the July 27, 2016 Finance Committee meeting are actually a bogus corporate record because they contain background information which was not discussed at the meeting and because with only the committee chair Rudy Parker present, there was no quorum with which to convene a meeting. Though Charlene Murphy was present and acted like a committee member, she is not named as a committee member on the GLA website.
At best, these “minutes” are a comprehensive perspective and defense of GLA's current collection work. As such they could be appropriate material for a newsletter or even a website blog BUT NOT OFFICIAL CORPORATE MINUTES. Minutes can only be the record of what actually happened at a meeting.
For the record, official corporate minutes of a meeting, such as this one where no motions were made, can only document that a meeting was convened with full names of board members who were present, that a quorum was determined and that discussion followed. A very brief overview of the inconclusive discussion could follow and nothing more. For the Corporate Secretary, Charlene Murphy, to post and distribute bogus minutes of a meeting without a quorum raises many legal questions.
Proper minutes should not include background information, opinion, speculation, or expectations unless they are needed to show the reasonableness of a particular motion. Because there were no official motions taken at this meeting, the inclusion of such information, especially that which was not discussed at this meeting, is irregular at best. The bottom line is that these minutes are a bogus record of a meeting that should not have been convened.
To misuse corporate minutes in this way makes make each of you officially and personally responsible, accountable and potentially liable for phony records. It defies common sense that those of you who were not at the meeting would use your internal email communications to review these minutes. What's the point or benefit of reviewing minutes for a meeting you did not attend unless the real agenda is to use minutes to defend and protect the questionable foundation and adoption of the GLA collection policies.
The use of personal pronouns in a corporate record, such as “we” and “our”, gives the unfortunate appearance of opinion, bias and even defensive propaganda. By contrast, an objective record of official actions stands on its own merit. Further, there is nothing commendable or professional when a conversational tone, such as “As you may know ...” is used in minutes.
I request that these minutes be rescinded and withdrawn from the official GLA records in the name of your corporate accountability and your duty to keep and provide accurate corporate records for the members. Thank you.
Donna Lash-Andersen