This is a transcription of paper minutes done by Matt Strait in 2019. I
have approximately preserved the original formatting, and the intent was
to transcribe exactly without corrections, however I may certainly have
introduced new typos or inadvertently corrected some.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Minn-STF Board of Directors #2 - Meeting of August 25, 1973 - Holst home

   Present: CHolst, MLessinger, FStodolka, GWassenaar; CBucklin,
            DLien, BSwanson; (later) BSchmelzer.

Meeting opened at 3:00 p.m.

    CHolst proposed that future board meetings include the Minn-STF
officers as non-voting members. General agreement.  He inquired if
DLien ad retained the original minutes of the previous meeting
(yes) and if FStodolka had copies of the Minn-STF incorporation
papers and tax exemption application (yes).  He then proposed that
any resolutions made by the board should be posted on the bulletin
board and published in Rune within the following quarter.  DLien
asked for a definition of "resolution" and it was proposed to bring
in BSchmelzer as legal advisor.  This was done.  BSchmelzer indicated
that any decision arrived at by the board is a resolution, but that
only those affecting the constitution need to be added to the bylaws
& reported to the IRS.  Discussion over whether or not an annual report
& financial statement to IRS is required; CBucklin read IRS quote
indicating negative and BSchmelzer agreed.

    At this point CHolst formally resolved that "Minn-STF shall hold
combined board and officers meetings, with board members retaining
sole voting rights."  Second GWassenaar and passed 4 to 0.

    Brief comment followed on the alleged lack of active interest
and participation on the part of JKusske, the fifth (absent) board
member.

    CHolst formally resolved that "Resolutions of the board of
directors shall be published within three months of passage in
Rune; that until such publication, said resolutions shall be posted
on the Minn-STF bulletin board."  FStodolka second; passed 4 to 0.
CBucklin notes that the most recent Rune should also be posted on
the board.

    CHolst brought up the question of who should be considered able
to speak for Minn-STF in an official capacity, suggesting officers
only (or the board as a group, but not individual board members).
FStodolka requested definition of "speak for," as in speeches to
educational groups regarding s-f, etc. CHolst indicated no objection
to such activities, as long as it is made clear that in such cases
one is speaking _about_ Minn-Stf rather than _from_ it. As an example,
any inquiries such as the recent one from "Mr. Fixit" should be
directed to CHolst as President.

  CHolst then formally resolved that "only officers of Minn-STF
shall be spokesmen for the club." DLien objected (seriously) to
sexist pronoun and requested permission to amend the "spokespeople"
or equivalent. Permission was denied.  Discussion followed as to
policy allowing individual board members to be said spokespronouns,
FStodolka speaking in favor of this and MLessinger against.  After
some discussion, BSwanson suggested withdrawing formal resolution
status of this and simply pointing it out in Rune as an accepted
announced that he will be teaching another s-f course at the Unitarian
society, and DLien, as an officer of Minn-STF, indicated that there
would be no objection to this.

  CHolst noted that the Minn-STF secretary is charged with safe-
keeping the minutes and the Minn-STF incorporation papers.  DLien
replied that he is safekeeping the minutes & has never been given
the incorporation papers.

    BSwanson brought up the problems of determining who holds
voting priviledgs in general club elections and who does not.
Current regulations state that a voter must have attended in excess
of six Minn-STF meetings within the preceding year.  BSwanson suggested
that participation of other sorts be recognized: Rune collections,
parties, etc.  Discussion followed.  How many people would thus be
enfranchised and who?  how would individual cases be determined; by
the board?  how would "meetings" be defined?  if "meetings" are
redefined, should this be added to the bylaws?  if so, should the
redefinition be spelled out or should the wording simply be amended
to read "regular or other announced meetings"?  is a "meeting" any
function announced in advance and with attendence unrestricted (i.e.,
"open")? will this require sign-up sheets at parties, etc.?

    BSchmelzer suggested a resolution authorizing "officers in their
discretion to declare any generally announced, open meeting to be
an official Minn-STF meeting."  He indicated that it would not be
necessary to amend the bylaws.  A signup sheet should be maintained.

    CHolst then resolved that "officers are authorized to define any
generally announced open meeting as an official Minn-STF meeting for
the purposes of fulfilling voting privileges."  Seconded and passed
without opposition.

    CHolst suggested that lists of eligible voters be drawn up in
advance from the signup sheets (actually offered as resolution, but
no second or vote followed, apparently an oversight).  CBucklin
suggested that a list so compiled should be posted or published in
advance of the election.

    CHolst offered a clarification of voting regulations.  For
board elections, an eligible voter must have attended seven or more
meetings (see definition above) within the twelve months immediately
preceding the election.  (This is also the case with possible special
elections requiring a vote of the entire membership.)  For informal
meeting-to-meeting business votes, any member (defined as any one
who shows up) is eligible to vote.  As these are informal, any
substantive matters may, at the discretion of the officers, be
postponed for vote and decision of the officers.

   CBucklin reported that the treasury is now deposited at Midway
National Bank, which offers free checking for no minimum balance.
Currently we have $211.46 in checking; $440.73 in savings.  She
asked for opinions on how many records and what kinds of records we
should require of creditors claiming old debts due them.

    CHolst asked re the upcoming party at Torcon if the $50 voted
to hold a room party should come out of Minicon 8 funds or general
Minn-STF funds; and, as policy, how much seperation [sic] of these two
funds were needed.  MLessinger suggested taking $25 from each fund,
and this met with general agreement.

   CHolst announced that we are bringing up 50 dozen publicity
cookies to Torcon: expenses and duty (if any) should be charged to
general Minn-STF funds, with sale profits (if any) being added thereto.
He also requested that Minn-STF members supply their own beverages
at said party, the $50 being intended to purchase supplies for the
entertainment of non-members.

  FStodolka moved to adjourn.  Seconded by MLessinger and passed
4-0.  Meeting adjourned at 4:00.

                           Submitted --
                                        Dennis Lien
                                        Minn-STF secretary