Mike6453

When my church has an electronic business meeting, we use three computers but just one screen. All three computers are connected to Zoom. One computer is connected to the projector and is set to speaker mode in Zoom so that the person speaking, whether in person or on Zoom, is visible on the screen. The Moderator has another computer and controls all content (slides/presentations). When slides or documents need to be shown, The Moderator "shares" his screen in Zoom - this way, the documents are seen in the room and to those on Zoom. The third computer is the streaming computer where the audio and video are fed to Zoom. The cameras are connected to a video switcher and then to the computer; Zoom is set for the switcher to be the camera. For audio, there is a microphone at the podium as well as a couple in the audience on stands for members to speak from. The mics connect to an audio mixer and output from the mixer to the video switcher and then to the streaming computer as well as the speakers in the room. In Zoom, the video switcher is set as the microphone. The audio from the streaming computer (Zoom) is connected to the audio mixer and to the room speakers so people in the room can hear folks on Zoom. I hope this helps.

You can amend your Bylaws to allow those attending electronically to count toward quorum, make motions, vote, etc. RONR has some helpful info for adding language for electronic meetings.

I have a procedural question about my church amending bylaws. Note that we are in the process of doing a major update to the bylaws and will present the entire bylaws as a revision. Our church bylaws require amendments to be presented at one meeting and voted on at the next meeting. My question pertains to when the proposed revision comes up for a vote. Can members make motions to amend the proposed revision? And if this is allowed, I presume each amendment motion would be handled separately. But if an amendment to the revision is approved, does the church vote on the entire revision as amended at that meeting or must it be delayed until the next meeting? Thank you!!

Thanks to you all I have realized that the our current language about decisions by majority could have been used to override RONR. We have some specific vote thresholds that RONR does not address, such as hiring, firing, excluding a member, etc. So this is what I intend to propose: Decisions shall be by majority vote unless otherwise provided in these Bylaws or the parliamentary authority, Robert’s Rules of Order. Thank you all!!!

Thanks, everyone. Each of you provided very useful information!!!

I could use your expertise on how to state votes required in church bylaws. Right now, votes other than majority are stated different ways (and I know that some of this is incorrect language and confusing): … by a two-thirds vote of members present at a meeting … If three-fourths of the members present vote to approve the committee’s recommendation … … must approve such … by a three-fourths majority of the members present and voting … Amendments … shall be by a two-thirds vote. I’m considering just stating the specific action is to be decided “by a two-third vote” or “by a three-fourths vote.” However, I am struggling with whether the congregation might misconstrue this down the road and somehow think it has to be three-fourths of the congregation or three-fourth of the members present. I know 44:4, explains what an unqualified vote of two-thirds means (at least two thirds of the votes cast by persons entitled to vote, excluding blanks or abstentions, at a regular or properly called meeting). On the other hand, I wonder if I should be a little more explanatory: “must be approved by two-thirds vote of those present and voting” (or perhaps some better language). Also, for reference to majority votes, this is what I am proposing: "Decisions shall be by majority of the votes cast by persons entitled by vote unless otherwise provided herein." Do you have any concerns with this language? Thanks!!

While drafting language to allow electronic meetings in our church bylaws, I came across something puzzling to me. I could use some expert advice. In our current bylaws, a specific vote threshold is mentioned in relation to the number of members “present.” Here are examples: … a member by a two-thirds vote of the members present at a meeting called for this purpose. … by a two-thirds vote of the members present … … If three-fourths of the members present vote to approve … … shall be by two-thirds vote of all active members of the church present. I looked at Robert’s Rules-12th Ed. 44:3 and it states: A two-thirds vote – when the term is unqualified – means at least two thirds of the votes cast by persons entitled to vote, excluding blanks or abstentions, at a properly called meeting. (I’m uncertain if “present” is a qualification referred to in the Robert’s language.) The current wording of our bylaws got me to thinking about how to count the number of people “present” at an electronic meeting since many couples or even families would likely connect using a single device. But the more important question is whether the language in our bylaws should be changed to the number of persons “voting” instead of “present.” It seems that this might match Robert’s Rules better and diminish a conflict that might arise in a very close vote and trying to determine number of members “present.” Thoughts/advice? Thanks!!!

Many thanks everyone!

I would like some expert confirmation on "Division of the Assembly." From what I glean from reading the 12th Edition, a member can call for a Division of the Assembly after a voice vote. The vote would be immediately re-taken by rising, but not counted unless the chair counts it or orders it counted. But a member wanting a counted voted has to make a motion for a counted vote, and this is not considered a Division of the Assembly. The motion for a counted vote has to be seconded and approved by a majority. Am I on the right path? Many thanks!

I have read the discussion above on 48:19 and seek further clarification. Situation: I am the Moderator; all I do is moderate business meetings of church. The church has no executive officer, no president, and no vice president. We have chairs of a number of committees, including the finance/governance committee that is considered the most senior committee. I am also chairing our Nominating Committee. At the next church meeting, the Nominating Committee has to present a slate of officers for next year. This is presented to the church as a motion and the church votes on the motion. Questions: Can I as moderator present the motion to accept the nominations from the Nominating Committee? I understand from the discussion above that officers other than executive officer, president, and vice president may do so, but since I am moderator of the meeting, I am struggling with how to proceed. If you experts opine that I should not make the motion, may I speak at all regarding the motion or the philosophy of how we operated as a committee to come up with the nominations? This would not be debating for or against the motion, just explaining the committee's work process. Thank you for your guidance!

At my church, I serve as Moderator, who presides over business meetings. I am not chair of any committee or council, just a stand-alone position. I am expected to know the bylaws and parliamentary procedure. Like you, I began with little formal knowledge of Robert’s Rules of Order. So I ordered the books and read everything and made myself cheat sheets of things to rely on quickly. As I read Robert’s, I tried to think of parliamentary issues we’ve had previously and I made sure I studied those well. Also consider finding a mentor, someone who has served in this position previously or who knows parliamentary procedure. I did that and it helped me considerably. And use the experts here for consultation. While not specified in our bylaws for Moderator, I am expected to remain impartial and I would vote only in case of a tie. Good luck!

Thank you for your assistance, Josh!

It doesn’t appear that your motion even passed with 50% approving. Simple majority is 50% + 1. And your by-laws require 75% for such an assessment, not majority. Like others have said, you probably need to start over and do it according to by-laws to avoid lawyers getting involved.

At an upcoming meeting, we will vote on a motion to hire a staff person that our bylaws require a three-fourths majority of those present and voting to pass. Bylaws don’t say the method we are to use to vote. I don’t foresee this upcoming topic to be controversial, and for routine matters in meetings, we vote by voice vote or moderator asks if there is unanimous consent. But based on what I have read in Robert’s Rules of Order, voice votes are not appropriate for votes requiring specific margins like this one and we should use a counted method. Some of us will be in person and some will join by Zoom. Because those on Zoom will vote by using the poll voting method, which is secret to other voters, I feel we should use a paper ballot method for in-person voting to afford the same level of secrecy rather than use a show of hands or standing counted vote. Do you agree with this? Thanks for your advice!!

Can you offer advice on how best to vote in meetings held via Zoom? In the past year plus, we've had meetings on Zoom and voted using the poll feature. While we were meeting in person, we almost always voted by voice vote. Voice voting on Zoom is a little chaotic since everyone has to unmute and then yell their vote. And voting by poll method takes several minutes for each vote. Votes are never split -- out of 50+ members voting, we sometimes have one or two no votes. Is it legitimate to ask for unanimous consent -- or ask if there is any objection to unanimous consent and explain that if there is objection we'll take the vote by poll? Or is there another method that will work quicker and better? Thanks for your advice!