1. What about the end of Trustee terms and the need to approve new Trustees on an annual basis?
If biennial meetings began right away, Trustee terms that are slated for an odd number of years (i.e. 5 years) and which are scheduled to conclude in an odd-numbered year would either need to be reduced or extended by one year.
However, it will take until at least 2014 to approve biennial meetings because amendments to our governing documents must be approved by a supermajority of the messengers for two meetings in a row.
Furthermore, if biennial meetings were approved, we would also need to approve a special-called meeting to replace any annual meeting for which we already have a contractual obligation.
What this means is that there should be plenty of time to align Trustee terms to a biennial meeting schedule without reducing or extending any Trustee terms. Those agencies that have Trustees who serve for five-year terms would need to either increase or reduce the term by one year. My personal preference would be to opt for four-year terms as this would allow for even more Baptists to have an opportunity to serve in these important roles.
2. What about emergency situations?
The Constitution already makes provision for a special-called meeting. If the emergency is worth spending several million dollars, we should call a meeting and resolve it. The exception should not make the rule; the Constitution already has provisions for dealing with exceptional cases.
3. I recognize that I may be overlooking some credible objections.
If you think I have missed something, please comment on this post. If you convince me that we should stay with annual meetings, and I'm open to that possibility, great! If not, I will try to respond as charitably and convincingly as I know how. Thank you for considering biennial meetings and helping me think well and thoroughly about the idea.
Up next
Can we really save more than $10 million each year by moving to biennial meetings?
No comments:
Post a Comment