Committee to submit a motion

[Barnabas]

Can a (church) committee submit a motion to the floor and having the moderator passing it through by saying "This does not need a vote or a second from the floor."  ???

[Edgar Guest]

The "reporting member" of the committee would make the motion. No second is required (assuming the committee consists of more than one member). But the motion is probably debatable and (with the possible exception of "unanimous consent") would require a vote. In any event, the moderator can't simply "pass it through".

[Barnabas]

Edgar, I thank you for your kind reply.  I am only concerned in following parliamentarian procedures -- for I have no personal or topical issue here, merely technicalities. Thank God, we have pleasant business meetings in our church, however, I am concerned that if the State or the Government decides to look over our Minutes, they may not conform to the Robert's Rules of recording the submittal of motions, their seconding, and voting, etc.

 

Could you please let me know if the following scenario is proper:  A church committee (consisting of several members), and or the Board of Deacons, come up with an idea which will benefit the church.  They discuss this among themselves, presenting it to the Pastor and are bringing it to the church body for their approval.  As a committee or the board of deacons, how do they submit this plan to the church?  Do they submit it as a form of a motion?  (That is what happening).  The way I understood this procedure -- and please correct me if I am wrong (for I worked 45 years up North with the American Baptist Churches in various committees) that a committee may bring their "recommendation(s)" to the business meeting, with a type-written text of their proposal, asking someone from the assembled body to make a motion on their recommendation.  If I recall it correctly, the church by-laws states that the church follows a congregational form of government, where the final authority is the church.  And as such, should a committee present a motion to the floor?

 

Please enlighten me on this matter.  Thank you!  Barnabas

[Timothy]

Typically, during the time for reports of officers, boards, and committees, the church moderator will call for the committee report. The chairman of the committee, or someone else on the committee, will read the report. (Which may be lengthy or as simple as a single recommendation.) So, it might be that he says, "The deacons recommend that the church purchase a new mower at a cost not to exceed $1,000. I move the adoption of this recommendation." Because he is a member of the deacon body (or committee as the case may be) no second is required. Aside from that, it is no different from any other motion.

 

However, the motion would be no less valid if there were a type written recommendation and someone who isn't on the committee makes a motion to adopt the recommendation. It would, however, require a second in that case.

[jstackpo]

Typically, during the time for new business, the church moderator will call for the committee report. 

 

A correction:  Committees report during the portion of the (standard) order of business called...(that's right) ..."Committee Reports"  (p. 26 & p. 356), not "New Business".

[Barnabas]

Thank you for your good replies.  In our case, during a regularly scheduled business meeting, after reading the minutes, the Moderator (our Pastor) introduced a "motion" from the Board of Deacons.  Then he said that "There's no need to second the motion, and this can be implemented since the Deacons unanimously agreed upon" (or something to that effect).  At that time I questioned if the deacon's board can submit a motion -- but since then, from your replies I see that my assumption was in error.  Nevertheless, in order to follow the proper procedures the congregation should have allowed to cast it's confirming vote.  Thank you again for your replies.

[jstackpo]

 Nevertheless, in order to follow the proper procedures the congregation should have allowed to cast it's confirming vote.  Thank you again for your replies.

 

Maybe, maybe not.

 

Check your church bylaws  --  the Deacons may have full authority over church expenditures and not need the congregation's confirmation.   That, if true, should be spelled out in those bylaws.

 

But you are certainly welcome!  Come back with more question!!

[Timothy]

While in some churches the deacons have a significant amount of control of the finances, the fact that the moderator describes it as "a motion" seems to indicate that it should have been voted on by the church. If the deacons are authorized to act without a vote of the church, then it likely wouldn't have been necessary to mention it at all, or if it were mentioned, it would come in the form of a report from the deacons but without a motion.

[Barnabas]

Thanks again JDStackpole & Timothy (one of my favorite character of the Bible).     By the way, we follow a congregational form of government in our church, so the final authority is the Ecclesia.  And the object of the aforementioned motion was nominal -- so it didn't mount up too much, I only noticed it because this happened before and it triggered a red flag in my brain.   And in reference to the Deacons, they do not have a discretionary clause in the by-laws for expenses, so they have to get the approval of the congregation.  Have a blessed weekend!!!

[jstackpo]

If you want to be (super) precise then, the congregation's (= Ecclesia's - ?) vote is not a "confirmation" (Posting #6) of something the Deacons did (they have no right to do it), but is the adoption of a recommendation that (presumably) comes from the Deacons.  Or from the Pastor.

 

Or from me, if I wanted to meddle in your church's business.

 

When dealing with money, no matter how much or little, precision is usually the wiser course.

[Barnabas]

Well that was my original question:  Can a church committee or the board of deacons propose a motion instead of a recommendation to the church body at their regularly scheduled business meeting, which in turn may become a motion?  For I was under the impression that the committees are required by the church to study a problem and then they submit or present their "recommendation" to the congregation.  But I was corrected that a committee indeed can submit a "motion" to the church body... provided they follow protocol.  My, oh my, I am slowly getting confused.  This Robert's Rules of Order is getting to me.    

[Edgar Guest]

I was corrected that a committee indeed can submit a "motion" to the church body...

But it's an individual (not the committee) that actually makes the motion.

[jstackpo]

If you will, the "submission" (from a committee, or an individual) is frequently a recommendation that some particular thing be done, and the recommendation is couched in terms of a motion.

 

So there is no real difference between a recommendation and a motion implementing that recommendation.

[Barnabas]

Now we getting somewhere!  You two have just illuminated the problem I tried to present the onset of this thread -- so that now it starts to make sense.  Could you please provide a "chapter and verse" from the Robert's Rules book for me to see and use, in case this will repeats itself in our business meeting..... so that I would not look as dumb as I am when I try to correct the situation.    Thank you so much Edgar Guest & JDStackpole.  Barnabas

[Edgar Guest]

See p.507 for Motions to Implement Recommendations.

[Barnabas]

Thank you so much!  (Now I have to get the book)    

[jstackpo]

Also get RONRIB:

"Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised In Brief", Updated Second Edition (Da Capo Press, Perseus Books Group, 2011). It is a splendid summary of all the rules you will really need in all but the most exceptional situations. And only $7.50! You can read it in an evening. Get both RONRIB and RONR (scroll down) at this link. Or in your local bookstore.

[Dan Honemann]

Thank you so much!  (Now I have to get the book)    

 

When you get your copy of the 11th edition of RONR and have read what is said on pages 504-505 concerning recommendations in reports of boards and committees, what is said on page 507 concerning motions to implement recommendations, and the examples provided on pages 514-16, you will know why using language such as that which is quoted in post #4 is not the best idea.

[Barnabas]

Thanks  for the continued education JDStackpole & Daniel.  I do appreciate you sharing your expertise.  I already purchased the RONR (hard cover, new) from Amazon.com for $21.80, and now I shall look into getting the  RONRIB.  I shall look up the indicated pages.  Thanks again.  You folks are very helpful and kind! 

[Barnabas]

I got the book in today's mail, looked up the info and it was indeed what I was looking for.  Thank you folks for getting me on the right track!!!  

[Guest Guest]

Thanks  for the continued education JDStackpole & Daniel.  I do appreciate you sharing your expertise.  I already purchased the RONR (hard cover, new) from Amazon.com for $21.80, and now I shall look into getting the  RONRIB.  I shall look up the indicated pages.  Thanks again.  You folks are very helpful and kind! 

 

I emphatically endorse Dr. Stackpole's recommendation of RONR - IB (do you think he spells "e-mail" without the hyphen, too??), and I'd like to observe that it shouldn't take you nearly an evening (especially if you start in the morning) to read it, your first time, unless you're a college graduate and feel obliged to confirm the formal definition of a majority vote by counting on your fingers, which usually results in your dropping the book as you wiggle them and losing your place.

 

O, but Barnabas, I am unsettled by your saying, "I shall look into getting the  RONRIB."  As one of my role models, Yoda, said (off-camera, so yes, it's not canonical, all you crypto-Trekkie aesthetic vulgarians!*) in the second (chronologically) Star Wars movie, "There is no Look Into!  There is only Get!"  So generally you can phone around to your local bookstores and find one that carries RONR-IB (make sure it's the Second Edition!), and hie yourself over there without delay.  So read it now. Here And Now, I tell you!  -- OK, pay for it first, and do move aside so the other bookstore customers can buy their copies.  And don't bump the security guard, he will become an irritant for sure, because you're distracting him on his 53rd reading.  It'll take you maybe an hour or so, skipping meals and bathroom breaks and sometimes inhaling, unless, as I said, you might be some college graduate who makes a show of his costly advanced education by elegantly turning a page every few minutes.

 

Now, if you've ordered RONR - IB by mail, of course also read it at once: don't bother with niceties like closing the door or sitting down or unwrapping it.  Read it (your first time) standing there right now, never mind the kids needing homework help or the kitchen on fire because you left it for just a moment or the terrorists attempting to sneak in by climbing down the chimney and stuck by their burkas caught on snags in the brickwork and screaming because they are stuck in the middle of an infidel's chimney and have been set upon by the 500 hungry squirrels living there, who have never tasted raw terrorist before, but, let us hope, are finding that they like it.

 

And yes, indeed, Barnabas, they are very helpful and kind.  These people are a gift, as is the website they inhabit like squirrels in a chimney.

_______

* Not you, Barnabas, you're probably not a crypto-Trekkie, nor an aesthetic vulgarian.  But I can send you a membership application, if you like.

__________

N.B. "Aesthetic vulgarian" is from James' Portrait of a Lady, which I have been slogging through since before 1990 (I know because that's the date stamp on my library copy, they gave up on it and I just paid for it).  And enjoying it more with each attempt.  The phrase appears around the middle of the six-page paragraph (no kidding) that occupies most of Ch. IV ("4", for those of you brought up after the decline of the Roman Empire), in a sentence comparing Isabel, the title character, to her older sister Edith:  "Nineteen persons out of twenty (including the younger sister herself) pronounced Edith infinitely the prettier of the two; but the twentieth, besides reversing the judgement, had the entertainment of thinking all the others aesthetic vulgarians."

 

Neat, huh?

[Guest Nancy N.]

O nuts, that was me.

[Edgar Guest]

O nuts, that was me.

 

As if there was any doubt?

[jstackpo]

Awww...  Edgar and Nancy N. Guest are having their first (public) contretemps.

[Barnabas]

Nancy N. you must be a writer -- and funny at that!  By the way, thank you for your advice on RONR-IB 2nd Edition.