|
Trustee Ellen Eckman, Ph.D. argues what the question becomes without
really being able to articulate it (Here is the Village
clerk’s tape recording of the meeting) (Trustee Lang asks that she be allowed to amend minutes
of a previous meeting to offer some of the reasons she voted “no” on an item) Partial transcript of
doesn’t reflect the
major discussion on anyone’s part. So it would include only one discussion
piece . . . we probably should go back and take a look at exactly we recall
as the nature of the discussion. Because at the time of the vote there were
lots of things that went back and forth. President Kohlenberg: Does anyone else have an issue with inserting a
sentence in there? Trustee Johnson: I guess the only thing I would say . . . I don’t
mind putting it in so much but if it, it has to be only items you discussed
at the meeting. Trustee Phinney: I appreciate what Trustee Eckman has raised, but
I do think that in as much as you chose to vote “No” and differentiate
yourself from the rest of the Board, I don’t have a problem with something
being inserted. Again, along the lines of what Trustee Johnson said. Trustee Eckman: But I’m not disagreeing with you. Meeting minutes do not reflect
(Inaudible) enough. The entire public record is what happened. It only
reflects the vote. So what I’m saying is perhaps we need to, not now, but at
committee, but perhaps the whole section needs to be longer and it would
reflect all of the discussion, not just one trustee’s discussion, but all of
the discussion. Inaudible Trustee Eckman: No, but it doesn’t reflect, there was quite a bit of discussion, on
both, on all sides and so, it’s it’s a, unless it’s
in the (inaudible) maybe people are comfortable enough . . . Trustee Phinney: I guess
the whole issue of what our view of minutes are, and
minutes are intended, they are necessarily the interpretation of the minute
taker, the note taker. And they are not intended to be comprehensive, nor are
they transcriptions. So, you know, in that respect, I can understand given
the fact that you were the lone vote against the resolution that you might
want it reflected as to what the central cause was to your objection. But I think
as a general rule, the reason I seconded the approval of the minutes this
evening was that I think it adequately reflected what the content of our
meeting was, which I think are what minutes are about. Later: President Kohlenberg: Any issues at all with that? We have a motion,
we have a second. Trustee Eckman: You’re asking me if I approve of it. (Inaudible) I mean, I, I mean
I’ll accept it, but my feeling is that the minutes did reflect the discussion
but it might be more appropriate to use something similar to the, uh, you
know, there’s another case where, uh, Trustee Lang abstains because she’s not
reading the entire document, you, you know, Trustee Lang voted in the
negative, I mean, and then we need to make sure that we do this all the time,
on all the votes. I mean, you’re not the only one who’s the only one who
votes, you know, when there’s two in the negative, I mean, but, I think
Trustee Phinney said that it is not a verbatim and when we go back and add things we establish
a different precedent for it no longer being a verbatim. Well, the question
becomes amending it to really reflect what it says, and I would say let’s go
back and listen to the tape, then you would really be amending it to reflect
exactly what was said. President Kohlenberg: I, I, I think historically, if, if any trustee
really had an issue with the interpretation of their actions, the grace of
the Board has been not to dispute that. So . . . Trustee Eckman: I’m not going to dispute it, I’m just saying that we need to, you
know, um, be attentive to the facts and, and be attentive to what we want the
minutes to reflect and perhaps on an evening when several (inaudible) that we
at that point make a statement so that statement can be reflected in the
minutes. President Kohlenberg: My understanding is that you’ve accepted the
amended motion? Trustee Eckman: Yes. |
