Tom Coronite Posted October 21, 2015 at 01:15 PM Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 at 01:15 PM I am trying to understand p. 496 lines 30-35 and what specifically is meant by "should be voted on as is the case in an election. This is the context in which I am reading it: our bylaws state, in order to fill a vacancy of a pastor, "The Church shall choose, by ballot, a Pastoral Search Committee consisting of 7 members and 2 alternate representatives of the congregation." Given that the bylaws require a ballot vote, is method "e" on page 496 a possibility? Can we have a motion to appoint this committee, including 9 names, and then vote on that motion by ballot? Or are we limited to method "a" on p. 493? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted October 21, 2015 at 01:24 PM Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 at 01:24 PM This sounds like an election, so voting up or down on a predetermined slate would not be appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 21, 2015 at 01:37 PM Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 at 01:37 PM I suppose you could consider the "appointees" named in the motion to be really a set of nominations for those positions. Then you could vote on each one or write in someone else and vote for him/her. Or first nominate additional candidates. BTW, I trust you have decided ahead of time (by adopting a rule, presumably) how to filter out the 2 alternates from the full field of nominees (at least 9 presumably) to be voted on. Perhaps vote for 7 first time around, then 2 more in a second voting round. Picking the 2 lowest vote getters from the original field of 9 is not a good plan: those two may have come in last for VERY good reasons and you wouldn't want them to be alternates (who might end up on the committee) under any circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted October 21, 2015 at 01:48 PM Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 at 01:48 PM There are already excellent rules on how to elect people, so, to the extent that they apply and are not inconsistent with higher rules, why monkey around? [Edited to add and] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curiosulus Posted October 21, 2015 at 03:00 PM Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 at 03:00 PM This is the context in which I am reading it: our bylaws state, in order to fill a vacancy of a pastor, "The Church shall choose, by ballot, a Pastoral Search Committee consisting of 7 members and 2 alternate representatives of the congregation." The plain meaning of this sentence, to me, is that you must elect members by voting for them on a ballot, not by adopting a motion which names them. However, your congregation is the ultimate judge of its own rules. If there is controversy at your meeting, raise a Point of Order and let the chair and/or members decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Coronite Posted October 21, 2015 at 04:09 PM Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 at 04:09 PM There are already excellent rules on how to elect people, so, to the extent that they apply are not inconsistent with higher rules, why monkey around? Ultimately I would like to see us do away with the bylaw requirement that the committee be chosen by ballot. A ballot election would always be an option, of course, but I think it better to have flexibility so circumstances can dictate the method. I'm trying to see if there's a less cumbersome way for us to have this election than what happened last time. Thus, the monkeying.The plain meaning of this sentence, to me, is that you must elect members by voting for them on a ballot, not by adopting a motion which names them. However, your congregation is the ultimate judge of its own rules. If there is controversy at your meeting, raise a Point of Order and let the chair and/or members decide.No controversy, but I am wondering if the "as is the case in an election" phrase means method e could be a way of doing an election. Your point is well taken that we are the judge of our own rules, and I note our rule says "choose" by ballot rather than "elect". And yes, I realize I am engaging in semantics there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curiosulus Posted October 21, 2015 at 06:06 PM Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 at 06:06 PM No controversy, but I am wondering if the "as is the case in an election" phrase means method e could be a way of doing an election. No, I don't think so. The way one votes "as in the case of an election" is to name a person, not "yes" or "no." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Coronite Posted October 21, 2015 at 07:04 PM Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 at 07:04 PM No, I don't think so. The way one votes "as in the case of an election" is to name a person, not "yes" or "no." Ah! Yes, that's helpful. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted October 21, 2015 at 07:20 PM Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 at 07:20 PM Ultimately I would like to see us do away with the bylaw requirement that the committee be chosen by ballot. A ballot election would always be an option, of course, but I think it better to have flexibility so circumstances can dictate the method. I'm trying to see if there's a less cumbersome way for us to have this election than what happened last time. Thus, the monkeying.No controversy, but I am wondering if the "as is the case in an election" phrase means method e could be a way of doing an election. Your point is well taken that we are the judge of our own rules, and I note our rule says "choose" by ballot rather than "elect". And yes, I realize I am engaging in semantics there. RONR clearly recommends election by ballot for "important committees with extensive powers", In the context of a church congregation, there are few committees that could be considered more important than a Pastoral Search committee. The authors of your bylaws (wisely, in my view) have pretty clearly chosen method a) for appointment of this committee--probably for just that reason. The purpose of a ballot vote is to preserve the secrecy of each member's vote, thereby encouraging each member to vote freely without the pressure that might occur if his vote were known. It's easy to say that ballot voting "would always be an option", but unless a ballot vote is mandated it would be necessary to pass a motion to do so.. A member who moves or supports such a motion would reveal his desire for secrecy, which might cause other members to draw conclusions from that. Unless you're searching for new pastors with unusual frequency, it's hard to imagine why a simple ballot vote to populate such an important committee would be an undue hardship. I don't know "what happened last time", but if the voting process was a source of friction, that's all the more reason to use a secret ballot, and to mandate it in the bylaws. But I'm not a member, so it really doesn't matter what I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.