Can we talk?

Parliamentary Rules and By-Laws

         Today I learned a few things. I never knew that a church business meeting could have absentee voters. Our by-laws allow for such, but they have to be announced by the moderator: who is the absentee and who is placing their vote. I'm sure more would take advantage of this if they could. The ones doing this had family emergencies, so the issue came up at the last minute.Someone had to have advised them of the by-law. Who reads by-laws other than the people who handle personnel?

         I further learned that not knowing how parliamentary procedure works can hurt your stand. As far as I'm concerned the unusual matter at hand was handled the way I wanted. But we won my a simple 2/3 majority, which means there will be hurt feelings and grudges. The motion in question could have been amended, but the folks who wanted that didn't know how to do it, and didn't ask until the last minute.

         We always have a town hall meeting before an official meeting, unless it's a special "called" meeting. That gives us time to ask questions and argue out some things in advance and keep the official meetings shorter. It also gives us time to research the questions that come up. At this town hall meeting, the moderator told us what the procedure would be. The motion would be presented by committee, then reread by the moderator, then the floor would open for discussion. No one could speak a second time until everyone who wanted to speak had a first opportunity. We could table it, which could be a 3 month delay on an immediate issue, send it back to committee with specific instructions, or make amendments. If you make an amendment, you call for a vote to accept the amendment. If it passes, then you vote on the amended motion. If it fails, then the original motion is back on the floor. What he didn't say that night is that if the motion is voted on as is, and fails, then a new motion could be made by anyone over the age 16 who is qualified to vote.

         Today we actually found ourselves in the vote, ballots passed out for secrecy, before someone asked, "What if this doesn't pass?" I knew the answer, but some others didn't. The ones who wanted to make an amendment suddenly realized they had missed their chance. They began to hope it would fail. That was unfortunate. I knew something was wrong because I expected more trouble. But it went so quietly and smoothly into that vote before a wave of horror went through the place.

         The next time I will know, as clerk, to remind the moderator to go through the procedural possibilities before we start. I know it is incumbent upon the people who want to resist a motion or action to find out in advance what they must do. But this is not Congress. We want to be fair and open-minded, and allow our opposition the opportunity to state their case and have their chance. I would have accepted the amendment if my way had lost. That's the way majority rule works. We still have a unity when it's all said and done. But we want to be fair and just in the process.