[MassHistPres] What should go in minutes

[Jonathan Feist]

Hi all,

Here's an follow-up to my previous thread about minutes being public  
documents.

Perhaps I shouldn't have been surprised to be greeted at last nights   
HC meeting by a furious group of citizens. One of them had decided to  
scour all of our minutes from the past three years, in hopes of  
finding whether we had discussed an issue of concern to her (out of  
our real jurisdiction). She picked up on some mentions regarding an  
unrelated issue that we did talk about, took various quotations from  
the minutes  out of context, and decided that a conspiracy was afoot.

As an example, there was a mention in the minutes that Chris Skelly,  
on a visit a few months ago, suggested that we try to see whether we  
can get the schools to include more curriculum related to Harvard's  
history. This was seen by her as an attempt to brainwash the town's  
children so that we could turn them against their parents, as part of  
out master scheme to implement some nefarious agenda.

Staggering!

So, she got a mob together. There was a newspaper reporter and even a  
few nuns. The topic she told the crowd we were going to discuss wasn't  
actually on the agenda. In an attempt to diffuse the mob, I gave them  
15 minutes to voice their concerns, and then most of them left, though  
the ringleader stuck around, and I eventually let her bring up the  
issue that concerned her, after all our planned business was done.  
Surprisingly, none of my fellow commissioners seemed to want to join  
her in her crusade....

Despite the pitchforks and torches, I found it to be a terrific  
learning experience. Perhaps, I should have simply bored them with the  
two hours of real business we needed to get through, and then invited  
anyone still standing to talk at 10:00 PM, but I felt the need to  
release the tension in the room.

Anyhow, I've arrived at the following list of what I believe should go  
into minutes, rather than the detailed, helpful, and pleasantly  
readable documents that they had been previously. I would welcome your  
feedback.

1. Record the results of votes taken, including any language arrived  
at by the group for decisions, letters, etc.
2. Record what people agree to do for the next meeting.
3. That's it.

Assume that anything else in there is designed to be taken out of  
context and turned against you.

Cynical? Paranoid? No, realistic.

Thoughts?

--Jonathan

================================
Jonathan Feist, Chair
Harvard Historical Commission
jfeist at charter.net • 978-772-4864
Blog: Delights and Processes
http://blogs.townonline.com/delight/