I agree with Janice. I also don't think the materials are so
overwhelming that a longer period is needed. There is not many substantive
changes from where we were and what changes have been made have minimal
consequence and, from my reading, clarify understandings we have long
operated under.
Michael
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 9:40 AM Janice Friesen <janicemfriesen@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Ruth Anne,
I agree with you. This By Law revision has been around for quite some
time. I think it was discussed and then edited and changed at the last
congregational meeting. The idea, I am sure from the Coordinating Council
(which I am on because of the Fellowship Committee) is to make membership
clear. Many of us were not sure if this mattered much since we have never
been clear if we were members or not. I don't think that the other changes
of the bylaws were controversial, but the membership is important to talk
about. I know that it is important for us to include everyone in the
discussion.
Janice (not the official position, just what I understand)
Janice Friesen
(512)560-2609
janicemfriesen@xxxxxxxxx (personal)
helpimnotageek@xxxxxxxxx (business)
http://imnotageek.com
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 7:47 AM Ruth Anne Abraham <abraham.rad@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
First, any vote on bylaw changes would normally be preceded by a
significant time to study both the proposed changes and the old bylaws.
This should be in written form. Therefore, I believe any vote on bylaw
changes is premature.
Second. Although I haven't studied the bylaws carefully (see point 1), I
noticed there is no provision for grandfathering current full members. This
is an example of the need for more careful reading and discussion.
Ruth Anne Abraham
