 So that all of you will know that tomorrow morning I leave for Los Angeles, California to spend three days with the most important children I know, the children who are, and that happens to be Knox and Ford, otherwise known as our grandchildren. I am listening to that. I'm reminded about a saying and I had not planned to do that, but I'd like to share this with you. A number of years ago I heard this said, and I had a sermon about this at one time, is called, each of us is a parent of, there are only four children in the world, and each of us is the parent of at least one of them. One, the first child is the child who is. That child is very much present with us. The second child is the child who was, because we know persons who have had a child who by accident or illness is no longer alive on this earth. But yet that very gift, the child who was, continues perhaps in some ways to influence the life of someone. If you just think about Candice Lightner and what happened when her child was killed by a drunk driver, and then you get mad at others against drunk driving. The third one is, the child who is, the child who was, the child who never was. But those persons who tried to have children are able to do so, and I'm reminded of my second great teacher, Mrs. Stowe. She had no children. I learned when I was her pastor a number of years ago, and performed the funeral for her husband. She said to me, she said, you know, I told Bob when you were seven years old that Mike McKee will never learn how to read. But I was her child who never was, and much of who I am was because she saw me as a child who never was, and I was present a lot. And fourthly is the child who will be. And the children who will be are all of our children, and we don't know where they come from, but some of them have been on the border, held apart from their parents. Some of them are in foster care, but luckily somebody brought them together. The child who will be, when a woman becomes pregnant and they began to prepare the nursery. Each of you is the parent of at least one of the four children of the world. Let's live like that. Amen. So I want to briefly talk about the commission on the way forward, but what now belongs to the council of bishops. I've shared with you about the timeline before. I've talked about the mission, vision, and scope, but I do want you to know that now the tellers are beginning to pass out a document. It's just a brief document. More will be coming later after the report is issued on July the 8th. We began with a mission, vision, and scope about what the work of the commission will be on behalf of the council of bishops, which was acting at the request and the request of the general conference meeting in Portland in 2016. It is very clear of what we thought the mission, vision, and scope was, and it basically was this design a way for the United Methodist Church to maximize the presence of a United Methodist witness in the world. Doing that we know, you know, and I know, that there are differences about the matters of human sexuality, even among us, and especially in the greater church. With that, one of the things that goes unsaid sometimes or unacknowledged that I want to acknowledge and say clearly today is I know people who will do diametrically opposing views about this, and they are all faithful Christians. We tend to, when we get locked into a position or we advocate a position, understandably is to at the worst demonize each other at the best think that someone's simply wrong and we cannot live together in a church. And so the second piece about the mission, vision, and scope was to allow for as much as contextual differentiation as possible. And frankly, the Christian church has had to do that through the years and then to create as much unity as possible. I can imagine the people who stood up before us a few moments ago related to Hurricane Harvey did not all agree on the denominational stance or what could or couldn't happen in St. Louis, but that unity was impressive when you began to hear the passage of the First United Methodist Church of Portland. I can imagine that had we really began to qualify people on whether they disagree or agree with each other. When Christ's Foundry began its ministry 16 years ago, that to be honest, if it had not gathered people from differing theological spectrums about this, that that ministry would not have flourished, which is now the second largest Spanish speaking congregation in the United Methodist Church. Sometimes we need to put this in that kind of perspective. What I want to say about the motion, the rationale is that the general, excuse me, the Council of Bishops meeting of November 2017, February 2018 in Dallas, Texas, and May and 2018 in Chicago, we spent a great deal of time with three different models. At the Council of Bishops meeting in May in Chicago, I want you to know that I consider it one of the most spiritual, passionate, moving experiences, maybe the most on the Council of Bishops in my six years as a member. I see it because we don't all agree. We don't all agree just like you don't all agree. And while some may be opposed to what we did, even among our colleagues, I can remember those times we sat in prayer, I'm thinking I am a member of a body who is passionate about the future of the United Methodist Church and the Wesleyan Witness. I know there are times my colleagues, perhaps me, have been somewhat questioned, even talked about perhaps in ways about our leadership or what we do, but I need to say I want you to know that I am proud to be a member of a body that takes so seriously and is so deeply committed to the ministry of the United Methodist Church. Some of the people I respect most are people with whom I disagree. Some of the people with whom I agree are deeply committed as well. I don't see a heretic among them, in my opinion. But it's important to know that at the time when we finally got to Thursday that week in Chicago, the motion was clearly having received and considered the extensive work of the Commission on the Way for the Council of Bishops will submit a report to the special session of the General Conference in 2019 that includes all three plans, the traditionalist plan, the one church plan and the Connectional Conference Plan for Way Forward, considered by the Commission on the Council. I believe you have a document that's getting passed. The Council recommended the one church plan. Let me be clear, there's no fuzziness. That is the recommendation of the Council of Bishops, the one church plan. The others, the other two, the traditionalist plan and the Connectional Conference Plan is being sent as a part of the historical narrative about our discernment process regarding all three plans, knowing that each of the plans in different ways did meet the challenges of the mission, vision and scope. But the recommendation was very clear and definitive. One church plan. We really wanted the church to begin to go deeper into the journey that the Council of Commission has been on and the Council make all that information considered by the Commission and our Council available to the delegates at the General Conference and to you. And we do acknowledge their support for each of the three plans within the Council and the values of a global church are reflected in all three plans. But again, the majority recommends the one church plan. And that goes across not only the jurisdictional conferences, the United States, but the central conferences in the Philippines, the Europe and Africa, receiving votes from each of those. The preference for the one church plan is because it does allow some contextuality and an understanding of people to interpret differently. It allows for the central conferences, especially those in Africa and even in the United States at times to retain at United States in terms of local churches to retain traditional language and values. But at this time, we believe that it best fulfills the vision of a global and multicultural church in order to maximize our mission and to achieve as much unity as possible. I would say to you that I am not naive and neither are you. To think that that does not cause some people would be naive. In fact, any vote is going to cause upheaval. What I'm asking that you do is wait. Wait prayerfully, spiritually, and remember that you do not have any of the plans before you. If you have a plan before you that is the actual plan, some bishop gave it to you or somebody gave it to you who got it from some bishop. Those plans are embargoed until all of the translation and all of the official language of the United Methodist Church in order to be the global church we believe that we're becoming and that God is creating. We think it only appropriate and I hope you understand and agree with this that we not release an English version six weeks earlier than we release all the other translations. So July 8th or around that date is the when it will be released. So this is what I invite you to do. I invite you to be in prayer for your delegates. I invite you to be in prayer for the United Methodist Church. I invite you to be in prayer for me and I want you to stay focused on our mission because that is the most important task before us this day live in this present. I want to be transparent about where I am and what I did from the beginning in which we began to begin to take straw poles and reading each of the plans. And remember that it's easy for you to make a judgment without reading all of each plan and reading all of each plan knowing all of the implications of the plan. I supported the one church model from its very beginning. I'll make a judgment about that until you read. But it's important in terms of our going forward that we walk peacefully among each other that we also realize that we don't all agree. But there is a great deal that we have to offer the world and how we continue to process and live through this time. I know some of you in this room disagree with my stand on this. I can live with that. But there's something that would be unfair for me to make as a judgment about you or for you to make a judgment about me. And that is it makes me nor does it it makes me no less a Christian or faithful servant of Christ than anyone else because I favor that point. And this I promise you regardless of where you are it does not affect it does not affect my evaluation about the effectiveness of clergy in the North Texas conference or even my understanding about your faithfulness. But how we live through these months together will begin is really going to affect all of those. Friends this isn't going to be easy. But for God's sakes and the church's sake and I would say the world and the country's sake could we do this better than the United States government is acting now. I know there will be opportunities for you to meet with the delegation for me to engage with you in some other ways in the fall. Although I'm still thinking and praying about how that engagement will be happening and I'm in the conversation related with the delegation. I must tell you that I do not have a vote at the general conference the only vote I have of this matter I've already cast. I pray for our delegates and I pray for the church and frankly I stand with Jesus. I pray that we may all be one and name of the Father Son and the Holy Spirit. Amen. So at this time we're going to hear from the Connectional Resources Report Revan Jody Smith Revan Todd Harris Revan and Mr. Larry Walmack. It seems to be Walmack Day. Good afternoon Bishop and members of the North Texas annual conference. We have a number of legislative items to move through and we will try to move through them quickly and we're going to begin with our board of pensions and our chair Revan Todd Harris. Thank you Jody Bishop McKee members of the annual conference. I stand before you as the chair of our board of pensions and health benefits and it is my honor to bring this report. The board of pensions has had a busy but a good year. Our economic projection team met again to review the long range funding plan for all retiree benefits. This is a very important process that we go through every four years to examine where we currently stand with our long range funding. And the good news and the simple news is that we're in great shape and that our pensions are funded as planned for all retirees. We've determined that we remain on course to meet all of our obligations and that our current pension and retiree medical plans are fully funded barring any dramatic changes in the market. The health insurance rates for next year have come in and hold on to your seats. Believe it or not our 2019 rates for the default plan charged to the local church will actually be decreased. All be it yes yes all be it is by three tenths of one percent. It's still a decrease and it will average it out to about three dollars a month. Don't spend that money all in one place. Those clergy opting to stay in the most expensive plan will see a one point seven percent increase in their premium. The default plan set by the board of pensions is the second most generous plan and a selection of six plans. The difference between the amounts that the church pays for the most expensive plan and the amount that will need to come from the pastor salary is 64 dollars per 64 dollars per month of the six plans offer. But the other five have decreases in their premiums so look closely before you make your selection. The most expensive plan will have an increase over last year's rate. So it's really important that you go online at open time of the year and look closely at the plans that are provided for you. The defined benefit portion of the clergy's pension will also remain flat for 2019 over 2018. It will actually decrease by a total of four dollars per year. Do the prudent thing and just add that to what is sent in for your pension on your behalf. The defined contribution portion of the pension remains at three percent of the plan compensation. So if your pastor receives a raise that portion of the pension payment will increase. The comprehensive benefit funding plan has been approved by West Path and our board of pensions and can be found on page 26 of your pre conference workbook. This item is on the consent agenda as is the retiree housing allowance. Some of the legislation found in your workbook is on the consent agenda but per the standing rules the following items must be brought to the floor of the conference for a vote. So legislative item number four found on page 22 presents the budget for 2019 as approved by the board of pension and health benefits. And the conference council on finance and administration the total change the total change is a one point five percent decrease primarily due to the change in the life and disability insurance programs. The new program is not only less expensive than the one we were in previously it also allows participants to purchase additional life insurance as well as disability insurance should they choose. So we present to you legislative item number four which has to do with our budget and we put it before you as a motion seeking your approval. So we we move the approval of legislative item number four Bishop. Okay this is before you are there any questions with such good news at thirty six dollars annually to the insurance there shouldn't be any questions about that. If you would approve this will you raise your hand. Thank you. If you would oppose this raise your hand. I think that's unanimous. Thank you. The other legislative item that requires a vote by the annual conference is legislative item number six on page 25 of the conference workbook. The board recommends a two percent increase in the pre eighty two service rate for a total of seven hundred eighty dollars per year of the pre eighty two service those that are on the pre eighty two service a total cost seven hundred eighty dollars. Now this rate increase is based on the cost of living adjustment that comes out each October. So Bishop we move the approval of legislative item number six which increases our retirees amount by two percent which is seven hundred eighty dollars per year up for pre eighty two service. Any questions are you ready to vote. I don't want to rush you all those in favor would you raise your hand. Thank you. If you're opposed raise your hand. It passes. And lastly Bishop I like to do this every year. Last night we experienced an amazing ordination service and a commissioning service for new folks into the ministry. And as we look at just the richness that has come in as well as the richness that remains in our conference. Let us not do like we sometimes do which is sometimes you know we wait till Saturday. Not nobody in this room. No pastor ever waits until Saturday to do your sermon. So you don't wait for the last minute to point B. Don't wait to Saturday to do your sermon. Don't wait to Saturday before you retire to put money into your pension plan. Take advantage of the amazing resources of West Path begin today increase it by one percent every year. And then when you retire you won't be worried about whether or not you'll be able to afford to take advantage of the resources. That's the report Bishop from the Board of Pensions. Okay I would echo that as well. If you think you can't afford to contribute your pension plan now is exactly the time to start affording to do so. The time value of money and trust me those of us who are in the time of approaching retirement who are clergy here. We know the difference if we hadn't so I'm grateful. I only hope that the Central Texas Conference meeting next week and Waco will increase the past service rate. I can tell most of you don't know what that is but some of you. Jody thank you. Okay we move on to the trustee report. Legislative item number nine is found on page 37 of the conference workbook. The Board of Trustees met with the Commission on Archives and History to develop a policy for our local churches. Seeking an historical designation for their church in accordance with the Book of Discipline paragraph 2512.7. This legislation lays out a process whereby if your church would like to pursue a historical designation for your church we're giving you the steps by which you need to take. Essentially if you want to obtain this designation please if you want to obtain the one that is offered by the United Methodist Church the United Methodist Historical Society please proceed you are encouraged to do so and blessings. If you want to seek a historical designation through state, federal or local entities we ask that you come through the conference trustees to determine if there's a potential restriction that that designation will place on your property. Some of them don't place any restrictions but some of them do and some of our churches have experienced very negative consequences that they didn't foresee at the time that they obtained the historical marker and then they found that they weren't able to make the necessary repairs or not make them within the budget that they have. Please note that there is an amendment to this particular piece of legislation. The amendment is found on the website. It is not substantive so we did not reprint it. It involves the change of six times where the word church it has been capitalized in the legislation that's in the workbook. That would indicate that there was a specific entity that it referred to whereas we meant for this to refer to all of the churches within our conference so we have changed that capitalization to a lower KC and that is the amendment. So legislative item nine is before you and this comes to you from the Board of Trustees with input from the Commission on Archives and History. What page is that on? It's found on page 37. Page 37, item number nine. Fred Durham, microphone three. Fred Durham, Tyler Street. I do not want to make an amendment but I do want to request that one sentence be taken out of the section with the whereas and that would be the sentence some like the recorded Texas historical landmark RTHL placed restrictions on the modification of the physical structure. That sentence simply is not accurate and RTHL places no restrictions on the physical structure. I come not just as pastor, church pastor. Fred, can I interrupt you? Yes. Could you have page in line for us please? Oh, I'm sorry. That's okay. I don't have the page because I have the print out. It is line let's see. Page 38 and line seven and eight. Okay. Okay. Very good. Page 38 lines seven and eight. Okay, we have that. I'm not sure where I was but an RTHL. Why don't you start over? I think that's helpful now that we have it. Everybody's got it located. Yes. I think it's just simply an inaccurate statement. RTHL. I speak as the chairman of the Dallas County Historical Commission, that body which approves within Dallas County both historic state historic landmarks and state site markers are subject markers which are much different than but neither of them, not either of them have any restrictions on property. And so I'm just requesting that that one sentence be removed. Fred, could I just remove the words recorded Texas historical landmark and just stay with some place restrictions on the modification of the physical structure? Absolutely. Okay. I just want that because it's just not accurate. It also confuses this issue because there are other historic designations and even Jodi, I think when you said you have to go through the trustees for any historic designation, the legislation doesn't say that. It says you have to come through for any landmark designation. And that's a very real and technical difference. Almost every church over 100 years old has a subject marker for their congregation that has nothing to do with their building. But that is a historic designation. But at this time, I just would like all of that reference to an RTHL and the state landmark marker removed from the legislation. Okay. Can I insert something here? We sort of getting out of order in this way. I'm willing to let it go this way if Jodi's willing to do that. And because frankly, if we're really being tight, we just vote to amend. But is the body agreeable? Jodi, are you agreeable to that? Yes. Jodi's agreeable to it. Jodi's misagreeable to it. Fred, I know you're agreeable to it. Can we all agree that we don't have to go through the slog of trying to amend this thing? Yes. I knew you'd say that. Thank you. I just wanted to. Okay. Is that okay with you? Absolutely. That's what I was hoping we would do. Yeah. Thank you very much. Thank you for that. Questions? Are you ready? I'm wanting to vote on this one now. So we're going to vote on legislative item number nine as presented with the correction or the addition, the correction that's been made. You're ready to vote. All those in favor, would you raise your hand? Thank you. All those opposed, raise your hand. I see a smattering, but it definitely passed. Thank you. Okay. Let me proceed with the CFNA report. There is one more piece of legislation that does affect the budget and so it must be passed first. And that is legislative item number three, equitable compensation, the annual determination. This is a, well it's a legislation that I work in collaboration with the Center for Leadership Development on this. The amount that they are requesting for the pastor's subsidies and equitable compensation is $55,832. You will find that in the budget. So we do need to approve this before we can approve the budget. This is how much we set aside to help fund the churches that are on that path to being able to fully sustain their own pastors. So this is part of the budget. As a part of this entire legislation, we also set what the minimum compensation is and that is based on a rule that was taken by this body several years ago that that amount would be the same one that is used to calculate the increase in the DS salary. So as you can see on page 20, for an elder the beginning, minimum compensation is $48,868 and that is a 2% or 1.95% increase from the prior year which is the same increase that is applied to the district superintendents. Okay, so legislative item number three about setting the equitable comp and the salary is before you. Are there any questions? Does anybody want to state anything? Then I assume you're ready to vote. Am I correct? Okay. All those in favor of this legislative item, would you raise your hand? Thank you. All those opposed, raise your hand. Okay, passes. Okay, I would like to introduce the chair of our president of our council of finance and administration, Larry Womack. Good afternoon, Bishop McKee and members of the annual conference. My name is Larry Womack. I'm a lay member of the conference from First United Methodist Church of Rockwall. So members of the conference on behalf of your council of finance and administration, it's my privilege to present legislative item number eight to you for your consideration this afternoon. So item number eight has actually two action items that we need to take action on. First is the recommendation from CF&A that we continue to utilize the services of Ratliff and associates as the auditor for all five corporate entities that are consolidated under the leadership of the North Texas annual conference. If you're not aware that we have five corporate entities, those are the North Texas conference staff, the board of pensions, the pro-throw center, Bridgeport and Go Camp. Bishop, as you know, the Ratliff team has really done a good job and does good work for the conference. They've given the sound financial advice to the CF&A and more importantly, they have kept us in full compliance with the laws, IRS rules and regulations and federal accounting standards for their term of six years now. So Bishop, we move the annual conference's approval of Ratliff associates as our auditor for the 2018 audit. Okay, are there any questions? Are you ready to approve the auditor? All those in favor, will you raise your hand? Thank you. All those opposed, raise your hand. Okay, passes unanimously. Okay, the second action item is the recommendation to adopt the 2019 apportionment budget and the details of this budget are found on pages 34 through 36 of the conference workbook. Bishop, I listened to Bishop Malone's comments on Sunday night and your address to the conference yesterday morning and there are a few things that you and Bishop Malone talked about that I think are really pertinent to this discussion about the budget that CF&A has recommended. You reminded us that we're all members of the body of Christ. Bishop Malone referred to us as a big tent church and she reminded us not just to do church but to be the church. And you also encouraged us to remember Dr. Outler's admonition to do more than think outside the box but to be Catholic, to be evangelical, to be reforming and to be bold about our witness. You both told us to go into our mission field, to go where the people are and not to wait for them to come to us. We got to have a willingness to go, we heard. We got to have a willingness to love the world the way God loves the world. And Bishop Malone reminded us that it really does matter how we go and how we show up when we go. With these thoughts in mind CF&A is recommending a 0.83% increase in the 2018 apportionment budget to a total request of $12,135,254. Yes, members of the conference, that's 0.83%. Can I get an amen? You're all very aware that approximately a third of our budget, total apportionment budget is made up of allocations that are given to us both from the jurisdictional and general conferences. And the increase in those budgets is right at 1.95% respectively. The remaining 67, 68% that your Bishop and center director, superintendents and staff and CF&A have been working hard to manage makes up the balance. And so the North Texas conference portion of this budget request reflects only a 0.31% increase. And yes, that's less than 1.31%. Earlier today you heard the center directors make their report. Your CF&A was very pleased to see this great spirit of cooperation and collaboration between the directors as they made efforts both to streamline their internal functions within the conference office but still trying to maximize the resources that are available to the local churches. After all, we are still trying to make sure that we remember that our main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing. And that's to make disciples for Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world. The other details of the budget are found in your workbooks. All in all, Bishop CF&A feels like that it's presenting a budget for adoption that does what you ask us to do and that is to go. We've got lots of plans and here we have a budget to fund those plans. Now we leave room for God to do what only God can do. Bishop, your council on finance administration moves adoption of the 2018 apportionment budget as presented. Are there any questions, Bill? This is Bill Gavitt, Greenland Hills. I think the same request I made last year. I would appreciate a little more detail of these light items. You know, I have questions about how much money is available for scholarships for students. I can't find that in the budget. You know, and I'm sure other people have got questions about other things that they think are their priorities. You know, if we can't know where the money is going we can't make an educated vote on this budget. Please, I know you can't do it for this year. Next year, please, a little more line items. I'd like to direct your attention under the General Conference of Portions. You see the MEF funds. I'm on page 34 for those of you who'd like to follow along. The first part of the MEF goes to the global church and that's 75% of that and 25% of that MEF fund stays here in the North Texas Conference and that is what we use to fund the scholarships to our people that are certified candidates going through seminary. The amount that is there, exactly 90,000, is set aside to pay for the scholarships and the remainder helps with other things that they need in the candidacy process in accordance with the book of discipline. Okay, thank you, but as I say, that's not stated there in the budget. You know, it would be helpful if these line items were split out a little more that we could see what's going on. Thank you. Thank you, Bill. Are there other questions? Are you ready to vote? All those in favor, will you raise your hand for the budget? Thank you. All those opposed, raise your hand. Let's pass unanimously from what I can tell. Can I make just one remark here so that we all permit me? So I want you to know what the General Church is doing, the General Counsel and Finance Administration. You notice frequently we talk about the General Church budget, which is about a third of the total apportionment asking from the local churches and from the annual conferences in reality. So I serve as the president of GCFA for this quadrennium and one of the things that we have undertaken and we have completed is a consideration about the sustainability of the current apportionment system as it relates to the General Church funds. Now, this is not an evaluative conversation about how those funds are spent. That's not the work of the General Counsel and Finance Administration. That's the work of the General Agencies themselves, the National Table, but we did have a conversation and we're moving forward with the plan about what we can sustain. I want to be clear, we were beginning to think about this even prior to anything related to the commission on the way forward. We had been talking about this for the two years to be prior before I became the president of the agency and we believe that it's not that we want to defund everything, it's not that we want to defund anything. We're talking about how that there are things that we need to do locally that we simply are unable to do. I could give you a couple of examples, one of them is significant, I won't go into it, but it is one new church start a year to the North Texas Conference that we could rearrange how this is done. And frankly, given where we are, and I'm not talking about North Texas, I'm talking about the church, the starting of new churches and new faith communities is the most important thing that we need to be doing at this time. And anything we can do to shore that up in every annual conference around the world, we believe is a very good use of your donated and given funds. Anyway, I just wanted you to know that, that there's work going on about that. Okay, is that it? Okay, let's thank them for the report today. Can I just sing you at a time that I should have? Okay, four. Microphone four. Can you hear me? I can hear you. Okay, I appreciate it. My name is John Dorf. I'm a layperson from Highland Park United Methodist Church. And I don't know if this is the right time to do it, but in deference to your comments and with respect to the motions or the resolutions that have been put forward on human sexuality, I would propose that we table those until this or through the end of this annual conference to allow for the way forward process to be completed. Okay, so is that a motion to table all three that are before us? Any motion related to human sexuality? Yes, sir. I think there are three before us. Okay, is there a second? Okay, this is non-debatable. Yes? The three that are before us? So, I'm going to ask Judith to tell us that. One of the resolutions that you have is called In Our Churches. Do you want me to read it? No, oh, no, no. Okay, okay. Okay, okay. Yeah, because we'll have to have dinner brought in if we do that. All right, and the second one is, it doesn't have a name, what? There is no page number. Your standing rules allows anybody to bring any resolution to any time of the annual conference, and that's why they're not in the workbook. And the second one is submitted by Rachel Bachman, and it is, it's not signed, but it is a, where is the Council of Bishops? That's how it began. That's the second one, and it is recording the Wesley. I think it's primarily one that comes from the United Conferences, Fred. Yes. Yes, okay. And the third one? And the third one is for the Healing of the United Methodist Church, submitted by Doug Miller and Fred Durham and Mike Walker. Yes. And in fact, we were about ready to, because of what the Bishop has said, to withdraw our hours, but we will certainly defer to a motion to table. However, the first one that you mentioned is not about human sexuality or the way forward. It is about the discipline of the Methodist Church and what is currently in force, and I really do not think it should be included in that tabling, but should be before us in that way. Now it could be handled differently, but it's not about those issues. It is about those issues though, isn't it? About human sexuality. Yeah, because it's about the same gender marriages in the churches. Yes. So it's a clarification about in the churches. If that is the case, I'm not going to, I'll be happy for that to be considered, but all three motions have come before us or they could not be tabled. That is correct. I understand that all three have been distributed. They have all three been distributed. And therefore they are before the conference. Right. And the reason I ask that is that I would be for tabling all three of them, but I do have, I do want to request a decision of law on, and since they are before the annual conference, I would like to, after the tabling, Why don't you wait until this is done? That's whatever it is. But I would like to make a request of decision of law. Okay. Okay. So the motion to take all three is before you. This is not debatable. It is simply by majority. All those in favor of tabling those three resolutions before you, will you raise your hand? Thank you. All those opposed to the tabling of those three resolutions, raise your hand. They are all tabled. If I may, I would like to request two decisions on questions of law. Let's take them one at a time though. Okay. That's fine. Okay. Number one, since the resolution, that is I can't remember the name of the resolution that Todd and Rachel submitted. The what? The in our churches resolution. Thank you. Thank you so much. But since both regard that resolution, since the resolution submitted expresses the need for clarity and attempts, I believe inappropriately, to resolve the meaning of in our churches in paragraph 341.6 of the 2016 book of discipline. I request a decision on the following question of law. Does the phrase in our churches only include within the walls of the sanctuary or other church buildings or does it not also include on the steps of the sanctuary and on other church property, whether inside or outside the walls of a building? Okay. Okay. Is there a second? They're Bishop. Yeah. I'm sorry. Can I request a parliamentarian rule because this is not, I'm not asking for, I'm not asking, I'm asking for a decision of law from the chair. Not a, it's covered in paragraph 51 of the Constitution. This is, we're not asking for what is the other thing called a. Fred, I think the, I do think, I'm an opinion and I could be wrong and Pam listens and buys me this, that this does require a vote of the annual conference for the conference to request a decision of law. There is something called a declaratory decision which requires one-fifth of the annual conference to do it. However, it is appropriate to ask the Bishop to make a decision of law and if you look at paragraph 51 of the Constitution, it is, it is, oh, article seven, a Bishop presiding over an annual conference or jurisdictional conference shall decide all questions of law coming before the Bishop in a regular business of a session, provided such questions be presented in writing and I have them in writing and that the decisions be recorded in the journal of the conference. So that such an episcopal decision shall not be authoritative except for the pending case until it shall have been passed upon by the jurisdictional conference council. The point is that Bishops are always asked to make these. It goes then for review to the jurisdictional council and to the judicial council. I'm sorry, to the judicial council. Okay, so. For the correction. Point of order, microphone one. Don Wiley, Levers Lane. This is a point of, he's asking for a ruling of law on a piece of pending legislation which has not been adopted. So that pending legislation is no longer pending, it's actually been tabled. So the request for the ruling of law is not in order at this time. It's not about legislation. It's about what has come before the annual conference. This came and actually was before the annual conference by whatever action. But it is no longer before the annual conference because it has been tabled. I asked prior to that if I could make this. But it has been tabled so it is no longer before the annual conference. Someone will rule however I am making that request. I am making that request. That's a matter of parliamentary procedure. Once it's been tabled, it's no longer in front of the conference. We need the microphone at the secretary's desk on. So it has been laid on the table and would require appropriate vote to remove it from being laid on the table. Hey, can y'all wait just a second here? So, trying to get us through this morass. And I want to do it well. We don't need everybody speaking to this yet. So everybody just stay calm. So the decision, as I understand it, is if it is before us. I contend that it's not before us because you've tabled it. Well, do you wait until I finish? Thank you. That'd be helpful. And so I'm going to consult with the Parliamentarian again. When I say it's been laid on the table, it's a phrasing under the rules of order that means it is not before us at this point. It has been laid on the table. It's not that it can never be taken back off of the table, but it's been laid on the table. Point of order. Well, I'm sorry that we already have one ahead, but I... Yeah, I'm going to come to you, Ben. Microphone to... The request for this ruling of law, it does not pertain to any resolution. It is simply a request on an interpretation of paragraph 341.6 of the Book of Discipline. So the way it sounds is that Fred is actually asking for a ruling of law irrespective of any legislation that has been put on the table or not. I have a motion. That's in order. Stay right there. Also, if I may just point out that... If you could give me just a moment of silence, that would be really nice. Certainly, I'd be happy to. Decisions can be requested of the Judicial Commission, but when an annual conference makes a request, then it must be regarding two matters relating to the annual conferences or the work they're in. So whoever just made that point is correct. That is exactly right. And this is related to the annual conference and the work they're in, not necessarily to something on the table. Also, the Constitution says nothing about it having to be an item before us. The understanding of the discipline and the paragraph that Pam Liston just read us is that it has to be before us. The only thing that's before us now is the consent calendar. I'm thinking out loud with you, so don't go anywhere. This is where I'm sort of processing this with you. And my parliamentarian is shaking her head. So it's not before us. If that work is not before us, it's not before us. So there's nothing before us. We've tabled everything related to that. And once that happened, then any consideration about those resolutions, all that consideration is off the table. So I'm going to say that there's nothing about that that is on the table for us to then ask for a decision of law. Yes, Bishop, I'd like to appeal the decision of the chair. That's an appeal of the decision of the chair to the House. There's a second. Okay, if you would affirm the appeal, which would mean then we would... Charles Harrison, First United Methodist Church, Wichita Falls. Just a clarification, Bishop. Does it require a two-thirds majority vote? Unless you know otherwise. Okay, we're going to take a vote on appeal. My ruling was that it is not before us. So I would not entertain Fred Durham's request for this decision. If you would appeal, if you would support Fred's request that he can make that motion, will you raise your hand? Okay, thank you. If you would not, would you raise your hand? Okay, that fails. Thank you, Bishop. Thank you, Fred. Bishop. I think Wes was first and Wes didn't have anything. Wes, do you have anything? Well, can I bring in new motion? Just forgetting what we left behind and moving on with something different? Oh, yeah. The only thing I request is, is that I want to go home and pack to get ready for my trip tomorrow morning. But we've still got some time here. Wes McGruder, Kessler Park. Pursuant to paragraph 2610.2 of the 2016 Book of Discipline, I move that the North Texas Annual Conference request a declaratory decision as to the meaning and application of the phrase in our churches in paragraph 341.6 and whether the resolution entitled in our churches, which was tabled, is consistent with the meaning and application of the phrase in our churches as declared by the Judicial Council. Can I move that? I think the issue is the same as it has been previously just discussed. It would require it being taken off of the table for it to be pending, a business that's pending before the annual conference. Okay. You know when we're in trouble when we're giving style points, evidently. Well, then, can we just simply ask a declaratory decision on the meaning and application of the phrase in our churches in paragraph 341.6, period. It's not before us. All right, let me try something. Wait a minute. It's Becky's first and then I'm going to come to you. Okay. I'm trying to be fair. Mine really is a total change of subject, so if this has to do with this, then we can... You know, you don't get to decide that. I mean, I'm just letting you know. Okay. That's why they call me the chair. I love it. I'll go. On another note. You know, it's just the way it is. Okay. Becky Hinsley, Gracionata Methodist Church, and joining me is Jean Wood, our chair of our Cosro Committee here for the North Texas Conference. And we just wanted to bring forth that in light of the good work that has already begun through the report that Reverend Marty Soper gave this morning and the passing of an initial policy around sexual harassment and sexual and gender harassment for clergy persons in the workplace, we move that the North Texas Conference empower Cosro to do the necessary work in the coming year to review and expand the sexual harassment policy adopted today and bring forth legislation for an amended policy to be voted on at the 2019 annual conference. Okay. Jean, I'm going to assume you're the second on this. Is that okay to assume that? So it's seconded. Are there any questions? I think we're ready to vote on this. All those in favor, will you raise your hand? Thank you. All those opposed, raise your hand. Done. Okay. Thank you. Stan Copeland, your turn. You're going to pass. Nothing else before us. So remember we've got some other items here that are on the agenda. Point of personal privilege. You've got it. Doug Miller, First Methodist, Carrollton. This has been a lot of all that's been said recently about the petition before the conference. I was ready to make that motion myself. I'm glad the other young man did. However, there's one part of that that really concerns me is that we will get the full report after a time when we will no longer be able to discuss it as a conference to let our delegates know as a body how we feel about it. So I will ask you to consider, at a later date, we're back from vacation and seeing your grandchildren, the possibility of calling the conference together for one day session after we've had ample time to read the full documents and express opinions about all this we've written. So that's basically just a point of order. Okay, thank you. I know that the delegation's going to be working hard at that. Okay, Stan, I'm going to go back to you. I'm going to go to Andy Lewis, and then you've got the Consent Calendar and the... Yeah, that too. Thank you, Bishop. Members of the annual conference, the Consent Calendar has been properly before you since yesterday morning. The conference secretary has not received any requests to remove any items. Therefore, I move that the Consent Calendar be approved as presented on page 7 in the conference workflow. Okay, all those in favor... Is there a second? I don't know if it needs one. Okay, all those in favor, will you say aye? All those opposed? Excuse me, I'm sorry. All those in favor, raise your hand. Thank you. All those opposed, raise your hand. It passes. Andy? All right, with regard to nominations, I'd like to invite Jeff Lewis, our lead leader and the vice chair of the nominations committee to come and join me. First, I'd like to thank the members of the conference nominating committee for their commitment and hard work. Again, this year in filling our vacancies, we had approximately 36 positions to fill this year. The members of the committee are our four district superintendents, a layperson elected from each district, from the east, Melba Harris, from Metro, Eric Markinson, from North Central, Leslie Maynard, and from Northwest Rick Simmons. Also our conference lay leader, Elect, Danny Solis, and it was my privilege to chair this group. Let's express our appreciation for their work. The nominations can be found on the roster of conference agencies, which is the green handout you found in your bags yesterday. This year, we followed the same process that has been utilized since 2011, namely having people submit profile sheets as a way to express their interest to serve. The profile sheets serve as the first and primary resource for the committee to fill vacancies. Profile sheets were received by 16 people, and we were able to nominate 75% of those persons. The other 25% were not nominated because we had more people indicating a preference for a position than we had openings. The profile sheets for those few not selected will remain in our database and will be taken into consideration moving forward should a vacancy arise. As you look at your green sheet, the newly nominated positions and Bishop McKee's appointments are in bold in that handout. Of the approximately 36 positions we had to fill, one was nominated for another quadrennial year, the Bishop appointed two, and the nominating committee filled the remaining vacancies. I do have one change to make if you'll turn to the second page, the back of the second page, the upper left hand corner, lay women serving on the Board of Global Ministries. We would like to strike Diane Carnahan. She has graciously agreed to remove herself, and we need to add back Ronna Pickett. Ronna Pickett was mistakenly removed from her position. We were in error thinking that she had been inactive. In fact, she was active, and so we were striking Diane Carnahan and returning Ronna Pickett. Okay, any other corrections? Not to my knowledge. Okay, are there any other nominations? I see no one coming to a microphone. Are you ready to receive the report and adopt it? If you will, will you raise your hand? Thank you. If you do not, raise your hand. Thank you.