How do your bylaws define the Recording Secretary's role? And, more importantly, what do they say about the official process of removing an officer?

I can personally attest that the secretary's position in the meeting is very difficult. Not only is he/she charged with keeping an accurate written record and subsequent published minutes but as a board member is also required to actively participate in discussions and voting.

Sure, if she's continually playing devil's advocate or taking more time than an item requires, it can wear on peoples nerves. That's not reason for removal but is cause to reflect on one's own behaviour.

On the other hand, an officer is obligated to speak up, offer opinions and challenge ideas or actions when necessary even if it goes against the majority. If she has the backbone to do this when required then I say, "Good for her!"

In regards to your second concern, I'd say it looks like someone was counting on the "water under the bridge" arguement working in their favor. "Well, normally we wouldn't approve such a purchase but since it's already been done I guess we should all agree to reimburse...." I'm guessing it went something like that.

You cannot simply strike out passages or completely rewrite minutes just to cover someone's rear end. Especially the rear end of someone who should know better. And it's a ridiculous concept that is doomed to fail. You're going to have a meeting to discuss an issue that you want removed from previous minutes, vote on the removal of the 'offending' passages and pretend it never happened. Well, that'll work until the new minutes are published and the result of that vote is included. It's a plan that's doomed from the beginning.

I say go into the general meeting and report things in the order in which they happened. Minutes should reflect the outcome of the votes and the entire board should publicly support that outcome. However, as has been mentioned more elquently by other posters here, the general membership does not need to know that it was a contentous issue or which members were on which sides of it. Simply report that a purchase was made and that the board voted in favor of reimbursement from "xyz" account. Then just move on.

Finally, learn from this experience. From now on, no purchases are made without prior approval. Make it clear that any such purchases may or may not be subject to reimbursement.

I'm not sure where to begin. There is a huge problem between our Pres (along with most of the board) & the Recording Sec. The Pres wants to call an Executive Committee meeting to have the Rec Sec removed. I just need to state that I don't agree with this. She is stating it is because the Rec Sec cannot properly preform her duties because she is to busy challenging every issue that comes up. There with-in lies the true reason she and the others want her gone.
Here's what I really need advice on-
Something was ordered before it was voted on to do so in this years budget. When the vote was taken at our Aug meeting it was approved but not without a huge debate. There will most likely be a big blew up at our next general meeting about this. The Pres was told that the whole issue could be defused by just saying the items were order under last years budget that was still in effect until the end of Aug. Inorder to avoid out & out fighting in front of the members the Pres wants to have a board meeting and vote on this so when the Oct meeting comes the whole section of the minutes that are problematic can be stricken.
Is this possible? Remember the Rec Sec will not go along with this, but the thought is majority wins.
Help,
VP, Parliamentarian, Can't we all just get along-Gal