Last month February 2015 Next month
week 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
week 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
week 8 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
week 9 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Upcoming Events

Online Store
Please update your Billing and Shipping information when completing your orders.
You have the option of using your PayPay or other Credit Card on your Store orders.

The original topics proposed will be going to a special ballot.  There is not a fellowship ballot for the ABM.

For more information on the WSO Business meeting go to this LINK


-1 #15 RCA Virtual Office Coordinator 2014-07-29 11:18
There will NOT be a ballot for the fellowship at the 2014 ABM. There will be a special ballot by mail soon after the ABM.
0 #14 Mark R 2014-07-11 00:25
In 2010 my Cell Phone had a few features and the users manual was only 12 pages with a quick reference card. This phone served my simple communications needs well until I decided I needed a new features.

The new phone I currently use has many more features and the manual is much, much thicker. Most of the functions are similar to the old phone and I have no problem using them. As I need to use a feature that is either new or I am not sure how to use, it is reassuring to know that I have a manual that covers all the features and functions available to my phone.

If I have a question, I could ask my kids or friends, who seem to understand these things, but they are not always right, or I can find the information in my manual, which was written to provide guidance in using the features of the phone.

In 2010 the communications needs of RCA were simpler. As the technology needs of our fellowship increased to allow remote attendance and voting at the Annual Business Meeting the instructions to allow this process increased. It is true that the document "Standing Rules" has grown from a simple document to a 75 page manual. The reason for this is make sure that anyone can follow the process approved by the fellowship to allow remote attendance and voting at the ABM.

Simply because a document is 75 pages does not mean it should be feared of rejected. There are many questions related to the conduct of our ABM that Roberts Rules do not answer. Because of the special nature of our ABM we have special rules. To make something as complex as our ABM process simpler is to make it prone to confusion and conflict.
+1 #13 Structure Committee 2014-07-10 14:57
Comment #11 is inaccurate. The Structure Committee provided information to the Board of Trustees on 6-28-2014.
0 #12 Ruth irw Debbie 2014-07-10 04:00
Regarding “proposal 13” – that is now listed on the website as topic 7 – we can speak to this as the couple who submitted it. The following was what was sent to the structure committee:

Proposal to revert to the 2010 version of the “Standing Rules of RCA”
Motion A: To reinstitute the 2010 version of the RCA standing rules.
In 2010 the RCA fellowship as a whole voted to institute a nine page version of the “RCA Standing Rules of Order”. (Exhibit A) This is a document that takes into account that the RCA fellowship had voted to allow both by mail balloting and in person delegate voting at the annual business meeting. This document is meant to be used in conjunction with Robert’s rules of order, the accepted standard for business meeting procedures. In the past few years this original document has been amended to a 75 page “legal document” (Exhibit B).
As quoted from the current version of standing rules, the purpose of the RCA standing rules is:
The Bylaws incorporate Robert’s Rules of Order as the parliamentary authority for the RCA–WSO. The modifications to the various aspects of Robert’s Rules that are included in these rules were made for three basic reasons:
First, when possible, to simplify the parliamentary procedures used during the business meeting, so that those members of the assembly who have limited experience with parliamentary procedure may participate more fully during the meeting.
Second, to ensure that the procedures followed during the meeting both comply with the bylaw provisions covering by-mail voting and ensure the integrity of the by-mail voting process.
Third, to streamline procedures so that the assembly may address as many of the matters brought before it as is possible, given the limited time available in a one-day business meeting.
We submit that the current 75 page version has become a tool that now “governs” rather than simplifies and streamlines. Where any RCA member with a background in business would be able to follow or lead a business meeting, it has now become a process written by those with a legal background and directed by those that have created these rules. Using the principle of “keep it simple” and to allow those attending the meeting to be as autonomous as possible, we request the fellowship reinstitute the basic nine page document of exhibit A, with one noted change:
Replace the paragraph on page 2 which states:
At the 2010 annual business meetings, those RCA members attending the business meeting electronically will not be able to vote on matters considered. But those RCA members participating remotely will be able to participate in all other aspects of meeting, as listed above, as long as both the delegates present at the business meeting and those RCA members participating remotely can all hear each other at the same time.

All RCA members participating remotely will be able to participate fully in all aspects of the meeting, including voting, as long as both the delegates present at the business meeting and those RCA members participating remotely can all hear each other at the same time.
Motion B: to retain this ten page version of the RCA standing rules, unaltered until at least the 2017 annual business meeting.
In view of the fact that it took less than four years to go from a ten page document to a 75 page document, we request the fellowship to put a moratorium on changes to this simple document. As with any procedure, we need to “try it on” and see how it works, or how it does not-and then consider changes or revisions with a fully informed group conscience.
-2 #11 Ruth irw Debbie 2014-07-10 03:48
The final wordings have not come from the structure committee yet. I have heard that the Board is trying to consider taking most of the 13 items to a by-mail ballot instead of all 13 to the one day business meeting.
0 #10 Vicki irw Mark 2014-07-09 14:05
I think it is very important that there be open, transparent and informed conversation about these ballot issues, especially since it will be so difficult for many of our fellowship to attend.
0 #9 Vicki irw Mark 2014-07-09 14:01
I would like to hear the rational for proposal 13. My understanding is that the Standing Rules is an instruction manual of sorts. A reference manual. It is a document that the structure committee spent a considerable amount of time creating. It takes Roberts Rules and adjusts it to match our very complicated voting system. For those who are familiar, Roberts rules advises against combining by mail voting and delegate voting, but this is what RCA uses. The standing rules are simply a reference guide for use during the Annual business meetings each year. (It is similar to the policy and procedure manual in this respect.) It is also in recovery language, which Robert's rules is not. I am open to a discussion of how our fellowship is better served by undoing this document, rather than making adjustments if they are needed.
0 #8 Vicki irw Mark 2014-07-09 13:12
re:proposal 11- I do not agree with the wording "Should a member couple wish to serve as chair". Chair positions are held by individuals, not couples- this is true of the board of trustees as well as individual committees. This wording as written will be very limiting.
0 #7 Vicki irw Mark 2014-07-09 12:58
I do not see the final wording of the ballot items. There is barely 6 weeks to the convention. My group would like to see the reasoning behind the various requests in order to make an informed decision.
0 #6 Ruth irw Debbie 2014-06-08 02:02
You can find that at the following link:

Add comment

Security code