# Motion to hold a called meeting



## Ken_lamb (May 2, 2017)

At our last Congregational Meeting,
A member openly expressed some concerns about items not included on the agenda. This member made a motion for the session to call a congregational meeting for the purposes of discussing those items. The moderator of the meeting called it out of order as no business could be conducted that was not already stated in the agenda.

Is this motion truly out of order? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Romans922 (May 2, 2017)

I believe so. It is true that no business can be conducted that was not already stated in the agenda. 

The member is free to ask the Session to call another congregational meeting to address certain things by either convincing the Session to do so (since the Session can call a Congregational meeting at any time) or the member may gather enough people to petition for a Congregational Meeting. See below for exact information:

From the BCO:

25-2. Whenever it may seem for the best interests of the church that a congregational meeting should be held, the Session shall call such meeting and give public notice of at least one week. No business shall be transacted at such meeting except what is stated in the notice. The Session shall always call a congregational meeting when requested in writing to do so:

a. by one-fourth (1/4) of the communing members of a church of not more than one hundred (100) such members,
b. by one-fifth (1/5) of the communing members of a church of more than one hundred (100) and not more than three hundred (300) such members,
c. by one-sixth (1/6) of the communing members of a church of more than three hundred (300) and not more than five hundred (500) such members,
d. by one-seventh (1/7) of the communing members of a church of more than five hundred (500) members but not more than seven hundred (700) such members,
e. by one hundred (100) of the communing members of a church of more than seven hundred (700) such members.

Upon such a proper request, if the Session cannot act, fails to act or refuses to act, to call such a congregational meeting within thirty (30) days from the receipt of such a request, then any member or members in good standing may file a complaint in accordance with the provisions of BCO 43.


----------



## SolaScriptura (May 2, 2017)

Was it a called meeting? If so, only the issue(s) which were brought up in the announcement are fair game. Or was it a regularly stated meeting? If so, was an opportunity to have items brought to the attention of the moderator for inclusion in the agenda provided?

Not sure if it is "truly" out of order, but I would have ruled it the same as your moderator. For a couple reasons. First, the BCO specifies the procedure for "forcing" a called meeting. And this member didn't do that. Second, once an agenda has been adopted, that's it. Once you allow deviations, all bets are off. I cannot overstate how important it is for a moderator of a meeting to always maintain control of the meeting. Looks like he understood that as well.


----------



## Ken_lamb (May 2, 2017)

Romans922 said:


> The member is free to ask the Session to call another congregational meeting to address certain things by either convincing the Session to do so (since the Session can call a Congregational meeting at any time)...



Is it out of order for the member to convince the Session to do so in a congregational meeting. 

I'm confused because, requesting another meeting for the purposes of complying with the agenda requirement doesn't seem to be the same as transacting business, but scheduling future business. 

And if the session may be persuaded then, is it really an issue of prerogative over procedure?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Romans922 (May 2, 2017)

SolaScriptura said:


> Was it a called meeting? If so, only the issue(s) which were brought up in the announcement are fair game. Or was it a regularly stated meeting? If so, was an opportunity to have items brought to the attention of the moderator for inclusion in the agenda provided?
> 
> Not sure if it is "truly" out of order, but I would have ruled it the same as your moderator. For a couple reasons. First, the BCO specifies the procedure for "forcing" a called meeting. And this member didn't do that. Second, once an agenda has been adopted, that's it. Once you allow deviations, all bets are off. I cannot overstate how important it is for a moderator of a meeting to always maintain control of the meeting. Looks like he understood that as well.



While ByLaws may say there is a 'regularly stated congregational meeting' there is no such thing according to the BCO. Even for those regular meetings, the Session has to call said meeting, and so it is still a Called Meeting.



Ken_lamb said:


> Is it out of order for the member to convince the Session to do so in a congregational meeting.



Yes, because as Ben said above it is not on the agenda. The topic couldn't even come up.

Truly the Session is the only one who can determine what business goes into the call of the meeting. Because of what the BCO says, "No business shall be transacted at such meeting except what is stated in the notice." The Session is the one who sends out the notice. What's in the notice is the agenda, and not even that can be changed at the meeting because of the language of the BCO.


----------



## Ken_lamb (May 2, 2017)

SolaScriptura said:


> Not sure if it is "truly" out of order, but I would have ruled it the same as your moderator.



Why would you rule it out of order if it wasn't? Can't the session legitimately call the follow up meeting?

Isn't that fundamentally a difference between prerogative and procedure?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Romans922 (May 2, 2017)

Ken_lamb said:


> Isn't that fundamentally a difference between prerogative and procedure?



The issue is not prerogative *at all*, it is purely procedural as has been shown above. I believe it is there in the BCO so that when notice goes out something that isn't expected to be discussed can't be discussed. The reason for this is people ought to come prepared to discuss such issues, but if a new topic is brought up and immediately considered the congregation is not prepared to discuss such things. They could be caught off guard and not know what to do or how to vote. This is why we have what it says in the BCO.


----------



## Edward (May 2, 2017)

While the basic question has been answered that the motion was clearly out of order (BCO 25-2 "No business shall be transacted at such meeting except what is stated in the notice.", there is a secondary question. 



Ken_lamb said:


> This member made a motion for the session to call a congregational meeting for the purposes of discussing those items.



Depending on what 'those items' were, it could be that it would never be a suitable item for a congregational meeting. For example, if it impinges on the areas which are the responsibility of the session (BCO 12-5) or otherwise would violate the BCO. 

If one wants to play hardball, there are ways to do so, but one must have an exhaustive knowledge of the rulebook (the Constitutional documents) before dressing for the game.


----------



## Ken_lamb (May 3, 2017)

Edward said:


> While the basic question has been answered that the motion was clearly out of order (BCO 25-2 "No business shall be transacted at such meeting except what is stated in the notice.", there is a secondary question.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It neither impinges 12-5 nor the rest of the BCO. 

Thank you for your perspective. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

