Re-thinking Voters' Meetings

Recently, Community Church of Joy, a Lutheran "megachurch" in Glendale, Arizona voted to leave their denomination, the E.LC.A. Here's what caught the eye of PBG church: the unanimous vote of the congregation was 129 in favor and zero against. That's right: a church with 6,800 baptized members had only 129 people attend a critical meeting. (Feel any better about your own voters' meeting attendance?)

Clearly, it's time to re-think the entire concept of voters' meetings. Here's a few thoughts from PBG church:

1. It's time we acknowledge that voters' meetings have a very bad reputation with most people. At best, they're viewed as dreadfully boring. At worst, they are often places of conflict and fighting. No wonder they're so poorly attended!

2. Because they are so poorly attended in most churches, voters meetings are NOT an effective tool for communication with the congregation. Anything of importance said in a voters' meeting needs to be said again in written communication, probably in multiple formats.

3. Voters meetings reports must contain a level of detail that is appropriate for a group of people who meet only 2-3 times/year. For example, do the voters really need to see every single line item of the church budget or would a higher level summary suffice?

4. "Robert's rules of order", though designed to ensure the participation of all, have a tendency to scare most average people. Far from encouraging participation, "Roberts' rules" shut many people down out of fear that they will violate "the rules." If voters' meetings are going to be effective, those who lead the meetings have to find a way to follow "the rules" while maintaining an atmosphere that feels less formal.

5. If we expect people to show up, we need to hold them at times that are most convenient for people to attend. Most people are not going to come out for an evening meeting on a school night.

What has your congregation done to improve your voters' meetings?