You seem to have missed the point of the comment you replied to rather entirely.
What was "simultaneous[ly] hilarious and frightening" was that the "minutes" on the linked page said absolutely nothing about what was actually decided (and how) at that meeting. It's all just formalities about "not[ing] the presence of a quorum" and how the "agenda was approved"...
But the actual business of the meeting -- "one resolution was approved, and one resolution was approved unanimously as amended" -- all happened in an "executive session", so you can't even see WHAT those resolutions were.
They could just as well not have published any minutes at all, and we'd know just as much as we do with them. That is simultaneously hilarious and frightening.
What was "simultaneous[ly] hilarious and frightening" was that the "minutes" on the linked page said absolutely nothing about what was actually decided (and how) at that meeting. It's all just formalities about "not[ing] the presence of a quorum" and how the "agenda was approved"...
But the actual business of the meeting -- "one resolution was approved, and one resolution was approved unanimously as amended" -- all happened in an "executive session", so you can't even see WHAT those resolutions were.
They could just as well not have published any minutes at all, and we'd know just as much as we do with them. That is simultaneously hilarious and frightening.