We’ve all heard that the presence of UUs in Phoenix on May 29, wearing yellow Standing on the Side of Love T shirts, was obvious, organized and noticed by everyone in the area. What I hadn’t heard until this past weekend was that it had a positive impact on Sheriff Joe Apaio (Maricopa County, Phoenix) and his tactics. Until May 29th, he had been organizing “sweeps” of largely Hispanic areas looking for people in this country “illegally.” Based on Arizona law and flimsy excuses for stopping and requesting proof of citizenship, he arrested and incarcerated large numbers of people. Yes, he’s been under federal investigation for racial profiling, but that’s not the point. As of May 29th, the sweeps have stopped. We had an impact – a very positive impact.
One of the speakers at our meeting, Mr Joe Rubio, may have identified an important aspect of our impact. The super conservative folks who pushed through Arizona’s law that’s know as SB1070 think that the only folks who were concerned are the folks who illegally crossed the border. When they see middle aged white folks (like most of us) protesting their law, they get worried. It becomes apparent that the super conservative folks don’t have the support that they thought they had. They are far more likely to pay attention to middle aged white folks than they are to anyone from any other racial group.
So, what’s the message? Participate. Come to Phoenix for General Assembly 2012. You won’t necessarily have to overtly protest – your presence itself registers a protest. Your presence, our presence, is important. It will make a difference. Please join me in Phoenix, June 20 – 24, 2012.
Then again – don’t wait for 2012, participate in your state. Many states, mine included, are contemplating laws similar to Arizona’s.
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Saturday, January 29, 2011
UUA Board Meeting
I’ve just returned from the UUA Board’s January meeting – and I’m confused, conflicted. Should I be disgusted and outraged at the tactics being used by the US government to deal with immigration issues or should I be inspired by the work being done by many organizations in border areas to support immigrants and bring some order to the immigration chaos?
Our January meetings aren’t what you’d expect a board meeting to look like. Yes, of course, we conduct the usual board meeting business, but for this meeting, we went to listen, to learn, to celebrate and get frustrated, outraged, disgusted, and angry. It was an “interesting” meeting. I’ll describe some of the business actions in a future post.
Several members of the Board prior to the meeting, sadly I could not be with them, traveled to Tucson and to the border (both sides). My colleague, Linda Laskowski, trustee from the Pacific Central District, was part of that group and provided an excellent description of that few days in her blog: http://pcdtrustee.blogspot.com/. Scroll down a ways to the entry entitled, “Me llamo Lourdes” You’ll probably note that Linda is much more politically correct that I tend to be. I’ve seen some of the border towns and, since I’m an old white guy, have only heard and read the stories. The reality is truly disgusting. I tend to be skeptical of stories told from only one side, but if there is any truth at all to the stories, my confusion and disgust are well founded.
We heard from members of the Board, UU ministers, members of Arizona UU congregations who had participated in the May 29th protest in Phoenix. From many we heard about their experiences of being arrested and incarcerated in the Maricopa County jail. I’m pleased to report that most of the criminal charges against these folks have been dismissed.
We heard stories of abuse of migrants who had crossed the border and had been arrested. When they were arrested all their possessions were taken from them (credentials [both US and foreign], money, cell phones, everything). They were deported with no money and no credentials and no way to contact family or friends. In some cases where families crossed the border together and were arrested, members of the family were deported (with no credentials, money or cell phones) to different cities in Mexico. Is this an anti-family tactic? It sure sounds like it. Such folks are dependent on charitable organizations working on both sides of the US – Mexican border to help them reunite with families, return home or find work. Yes, some cross the border, again, as soon as they possibly can.
We heard about operation “Streamline.” This is a US Justice Department program to expedite the deportation process where it is required. I’ve read written descriptions that validate what we heard in Phoenix. Detainees are held in commercial prisons where they are fed very little; shackled together, hands and feet (much like our penal systems shackle serial murders); brought into a court room with fifty or so similarly charged individuals; and as a group sentenced to deportation. On the record these folks are assigned a public defender attorney, but it is likely that they will never talk with that attorney. Public defenders are assigned forty or fifty detainees at a time. There is no time to actually talk with “clients.”
Next – WE MADE A DIFFERENCE – YEA!.
Our January meetings aren’t what you’d expect a board meeting to look like. Yes, of course, we conduct the usual board meeting business, but for this meeting, we went to listen, to learn, to celebrate and get frustrated, outraged, disgusted, and angry. It was an “interesting” meeting. I’ll describe some of the business actions in a future post.
Several members of the Board prior to the meeting, sadly I could not be with them, traveled to Tucson and to the border (both sides). My colleague, Linda Laskowski, trustee from the Pacific Central District, was part of that group and provided an excellent description of that few days in her blog: http://pcdtrustee.blogspot.com/. Scroll down a ways to the entry entitled, “Me llamo Lourdes” You’ll probably note that Linda is much more politically correct that I tend to be. I’ve seen some of the border towns and, since I’m an old white guy, have only heard and read the stories. The reality is truly disgusting. I tend to be skeptical of stories told from only one side, but if there is any truth at all to the stories, my confusion and disgust are well founded.
We heard from members of the Board, UU ministers, members of Arizona UU congregations who had participated in the May 29th protest in Phoenix. From many we heard about their experiences of being arrested and incarcerated in the Maricopa County jail. I’m pleased to report that most of the criminal charges against these folks have been dismissed.
We heard stories of abuse of migrants who had crossed the border and had been arrested. When they were arrested all their possessions were taken from them (credentials [both US and foreign], money, cell phones, everything). They were deported with no money and no credentials and no way to contact family or friends. In some cases where families crossed the border together and were arrested, members of the family were deported (with no credentials, money or cell phones) to different cities in Mexico. Is this an anti-family tactic? It sure sounds like it. Such folks are dependent on charitable organizations working on both sides of the US – Mexican border to help them reunite with families, return home or find work. Yes, some cross the border, again, as soon as they possibly can.
We heard about operation “Streamline.” This is a US Justice Department program to expedite the deportation process where it is required. I’ve read written descriptions that validate what we heard in Phoenix. Detainees are held in commercial prisons where they are fed very little; shackled together, hands and feet (much like our penal systems shackle serial murders); brought into a court room with fifty or so similarly charged individuals; and as a group sentenced to deportation. On the record these folks are assigned a public defender attorney, but it is likely that they will never talk with that attorney. Public defenders are assigned forty or fifty detainees at a time. There is no time to actually talk with “clients.”
Next – WE MADE A DIFFERENCE – YEA!.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
More GA
Well, a couple more thoughts on GA – as my mind tries to return to normal --
Jane Greer of the UU World did an excellent job of documenting the various positins and debates that went into the final resolution: http://www.uuworld.org/news/articles/167428.shtml
Also, the Minneapolis – St Paul Star Tribune published an article on our meeting: http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/faith/96943709.html?. We got the first part of the article and the Evangelical Covenant Church got the second part of the article. Actually, I had close friends and family members at both meetings.
And, one other GA note. In response to the GA 12 business resolution, the following responsive resolution was passed,
“WHEREAS the UUA Board Report on the Business Resolution on Phoenix General Assembly 2012 calls for a gathering of Unitarian Universalists for the "purposes of witnessing on immigration, racial, and economic justice --‐ a 'Justice' General Assembly,"
“THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the General Assembly of the Unitarian Universalist Association strongly urges the UUA Staff, the Board of Trustees and the General Assembly Planning Committee to consider a number of conditions while planning for this "Justice" General Assembly in Arizona 2012.
“The Youth Caucus envisions a General Assembly in which:
“1. We gather in nonviolent protest with a focus on public witness and social action;
“2. Appropriate consideration is given to make this General Assembly accessible for all participants;
“3. Efforts are made to recognize the voices of delegates who choose not to attend General Assembly 2012 for reasons of safety or personal ethics;
“4. Worship services, specifically a bridging celebration and multigenerational worships, are preserved;
“5. Programming, including Youth, Young Adult and Multigenerational programming, is educational, informative and reflective of the spirit of a "Justice" General Assembly; and
“6. Youth and Young Adults are involved as both participants and leaders throughout the process.”
Jane Greer of the UU World did an excellent job of documenting the various positins and debates that went into the final resolution: http://www.uuworld.org/news/articles/167428.shtml
Also, the Minneapolis – St Paul Star Tribune published an article on our meeting: http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/faith/96943709.html?. We got the first part of the article and the Evangelical Covenant Church got the second part of the article. Actually, I had close friends and family members at both meetings.
And, one other GA note. In response to the GA 12 business resolution, the following responsive resolution was passed,
“WHEREAS the UUA Board Report on the Business Resolution on Phoenix General Assembly 2012 calls for a gathering of Unitarian Universalists for the "purposes of witnessing on immigration, racial, and economic justice --‐ a 'Justice' General Assembly,"
“THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the General Assembly of the Unitarian Universalist Association strongly urges the UUA Staff, the Board of Trustees and the General Assembly Planning Committee to consider a number of conditions while planning for this "Justice" General Assembly in Arizona 2012.
“The Youth Caucus envisions a General Assembly in which:
“1. We gather in nonviolent protest with a focus on public witness and social action;
“2. Appropriate consideration is given to make this General Assembly accessible for all participants;
“3. Efforts are made to recognize the voices of delegates who choose not to attend General Assembly 2012 for reasons of safety or personal ethics;
“4. Worship services, specifically a bridging celebration and multigenerational worships, are preserved;
“5. Programming, including Youth, Young Adult and Multigenerational programming, is educational, informative and reflective of the spirit of a "Justice" General Assembly; and
“6. Youth and Young Adults are involved as both participants and leaders throughout the process.”
General Assembly
General Assembly number 49.
We gathered in Minneapolis for our annual business meeting; we gathered to learn, we gathered to socialize, we gathered to worship.
A total of 3,880 of us (1,957 delegates, 367 ministers, 581 congregations) gathered. And then we went back to our home congregations to spread the enthusiasm, to share what we learned, to report back on what we all did at GA.
So, what did we do?
Some of us participated in a pre-GA meeting organized by the District Presidents’ Association (DPA) that included all the district presidents and many district board members as well as members of the UUA Board of Trustees. We talked a lot about governance, what it means, roles of the districts in governance and how governance in our association could be improved. Pretty much everybody agreed that there’s room for improvement. There was less agreement about how to improve or what to change. District presidents and board members agreed to discuss with their boards regionalization, how to better provide services to congregations and to report back on next steps. The meeting was historic – we’ve never had a similar meeting in the history of the Association.
We honored the Rev. Jane Rzepka, retiring senior minister of the Church of the Larger Fellowship for her long and dedicated service to the CLF and to UUism.
To Phoenix or not to Phoenix. The listservs have been busy carrying on the debate, various UU and UU-related organizations prepared positions on GA12 in Phoenix – or not. The Board had a meeting to resolve some of the policy divergences around Phoenix. After much negotiating (well into the night, umm, early morning) among advocates for the various positions agreement was reached and a substantial amendment was proposed to the Assembly. With some minor wording changes, here’s the agreed upon text:
“Whereas the state of Arizona has recently enacted a law—SB 1070—that runs counter to our First Principle, affirming the worth and dignity of every person; and
Whereas we have been invited to enter into an historic partnership with Puente and National Day Laborers Organizing Network (NDLON) to work for human rights and against racial profiling; and
“Whereas the UUA Bylaws specify that the power to call and locate a General Assembly belongs solely to the UUA Board of Trustees;
Be it resolved, the Assembly hereby:
“1. Calls on the UUA Board to gather Unitarian Universalists for the purposes of witnessing on immigration, racial and economic justice—a “Justice” General Assembly in which business is limited to the minimum required by our bylaws—in June 2012, to be held in Phoenix, AZ.
“2. Calls on the UUA Administration to work with leaders in Arizona UU congregations to establish an Arizona immigration ministry to partner with other groups in Arizona working for immigration reform to strengthen those partnerships in preparation for our arrival in 2012.
“3. Recognizing people with historically marginalized identities will be exposed to increased risk and inaccessibility, instructs the UUA Board to work in accountable relationship with Diverse Revolutionary Unitarian Universalist Multicultural Ministries (DRUUMM), Latina/o Unitarian Universalist Networking Association (LUUNA), EQUUAL ACCESS, Transgender Religious Professional Unitarian Universalists Together (TRUUST) and other stakeholders to identify measures that can be taken to increase safety and accessibility at the 2012 “Justice” GA.
“4. Calls on the UUA Board to direct the economic impact of our presence in Phoenix toward our partners and allies as much as is feasible.
“5. Calls on the UUA Board to provide the resources needed to build the capacity of Unitarian Universalists to stand in opposition to systemic racism in our congregations, local communities, and in our own lives.”
So what a “Justice GA” and what is the “minimum business” that must be conducted at a GA. Stay tuned – many details to be worked out, but GA12 will not be GA as usual. I expect that almost everything we do there will be focused on immigrant rights including economic, social and legal issues.
It’s no coincidence that we adopted a Congregational Study Action Issue (CSAI) entitled, “Immigration, a Moral Imperative.” Expect more information on this soon, but this CSAI will give us all the opportunity to do our homework as we approach GA12.
That’s enuf for now. More soon.
We gathered in Minneapolis for our annual business meeting; we gathered to learn, we gathered to socialize, we gathered to worship.
A total of 3,880 of us (1,957 delegates, 367 ministers, 581 congregations) gathered. And then we went back to our home congregations to spread the enthusiasm, to share what we learned, to report back on what we all did at GA.
So, what did we do?
Some of us participated in a pre-GA meeting organized by the District Presidents’ Association (DPA) that included all the district presidents and many district board members as well as members of the UUA Board of Trustees. We talked a lot about governance, what it means, roles of the districts in governance and how governance in our association could be improved. Pretty much everybody agreed that there’s room for improvement. There was less agreement about how to improve or what to change. District presidents and board members agreed to discuss with their boards regionalization, how to better provide services to congregations and to report back on next steps. The meeting was historic – we’ve never had a similar meeting in the history of the Association.
We honored the Rev. Jane Rzepka, retiring senior minister of the Church of the Larger Fellowship for her long and dedicated service to the CLF and to UUism.
To Phoenix or not to Phoenix. The listservs have been busy carrying on the debate, various UU and UU-related organizations prepared positions on GA12 in Phoenix – or not. The Board had a meeting to resolve some of the policy divergences around Phoenix. After much negotiating (well into the night, umm, early morning) among advocates for the various positions agreement was reached and a substantial amendment was proposed to the Assembly. With some minor wording changes, here’s the agreed upon text:
“Whereas the state of Arizona has recently enacted a law—SB 1070—that runs counter to our First Principle, affirming the worth and dignity of every person; and
Whereas we have been invited to enter into an historic partnership with Puente and National Day Laborers Organizing Network (NDLON) to work for human rights and against racial profiling; and
“Whereas the UUA Bylaws specify that the power to call and locate a General Assembly belongs solely to the UUA Board of Trustees;
Be it resolved, the Assembly hereby:
“1. Calls on the UUA Board to gather Unitarian Universalists for the purposes of witnessing on immigration, racial and economic justice—a “Justice” General Assembly in which business is limited to the minimum required by our bylaws—in June 2012, to be held in Phoenix, AZ.
“2. Calls on the UUA Administration to work with leaders in Arizona UU congregations to establish an Arizona immigration ministry to partner with other groups in Arizona working for immigration reform to strengthen those partnerships in preparation for our arrival in 2012.
“3. Recognizing people with historically marginalized identities will be exposed to increased risk and inaccessibility, instructs the UUA Board to work in accountable relationship with Diverse Revolutionary Unitarian Universalist Multicultural Ministries (DRUUMM), Latina/o Unitarian Universalist Networking Association (LUUNA), EQUUAL ACCESS, Transgender Religious Professional Unitarian Universalists Together (TRUUST) and other stakeholders to identify measures that can be taken to increase safety and accessibility at the 2012 “Justice” GA.
“4. Calls on the UUA Board to direct the economic impact of our presence in Phoenix toward our partners and allies as much as is feasible.
“5. Calls on the UUA Board to provide the resources needed to build the capacity of Unitarian Universalists to stand in opposition to systemic racism in our congregations, local communities, and in our own lives.”
So what a “Justice GA” and what is the “minimum business” that must be conducted at a GA. Stay tuned – many details to be worked out, but GA12 will not be GA as usual. I expect that almost everything we do there will be focused on immigrant rights including economic, social and legal issues.
It’s no coincidence that we adopted a Congregational Study Action Issue (CSAI) entitled, “Immigration, a Moral Imperative.” Expect more information on this soon, but this CSAI will give us all the opportunity to do our homework as we approach GA12.
That’s enuf for now. More soon.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Follow-up
This is a follow-up to my last entry. Thanks for reading; thanks for caring.
Please, discuss these issues within your congregations. Hopefully, all this will lead to substantive discussions among members and congregations and with your respective delegates and your UUA trustees.
DELEGATES: Come to Minneapolis prepared: to learn; to seriously weigh the factors involved; to come to a reasoned, carefully thought out decision; and to vote.
“So, when I have conversations in my congregation, or with delegates, or with trustees, what should I be focusing on?” Outstanding question! I’m glad you asked.
Remember that the board put this issue on the agenda for a couple reasons:
1. to get a lot more people involved in the discussion of what is the right thing to do in this case, and
2. to get all of us to focus on our principles in making important decisions like this one.
So, a few questions to stimulate your thinking:
- Which of our principles is in play here? One of them was specifically called out in the motion; are there others?
- The board decided that we want to make a statement opposing the new Arizona law. What’s the best, most effective, way to do that? Should we take our money and go elsewhere? Should we stay in Phoenix and make a visible public witness opposing the new law? Some other action?
- Does it matter that, if we move away from Phoenix, the UUA will have to pay just over $600,000 for defaulting on existing hotel contracts? Or, should principle overshadow any monetary cost that might be charged?
- What would you tell our members who are concerned for their personal safety in Phoenix?
- Does it matter that several other organizations have moved major meetings away from Arizona? For example, the following organizations have moved:
• The United Church of Christ has moved their 2011 SW conference meeting.
• The Immigration Lawyers Association has moved their national meeting.
- Whichever way you have decided, what would change your mind?
- What are the long-term policy issues when it comes to future GA sites? Should we avoid cities that:
• Have adopted laws we find oppressive of minority populations?
• Have adopted laws against marriage equality?
• Have recently been the target of ICE ([Federal] Immigration and Customs Enforcement) raids?
• Have particularly poor environmental records?
• Others?
BOTTOM LINE: We want to make a reasoned, carefully thought out, decision on how to proceed. If you can participate at GA in Minneapolis, great. If can’t make it to GA this year, please ensure you’re your delegates know your thoughts.
Also, please let me know (lphinney@uua.org) so that I can participate on your behalf.
Please, discuss these issues within your congregations. Hopefully, all this will lead to substantive discussions among members and congregations and with your respective delegates and your UUA trustees.
DELEGATES: Come to Minneapolis prepared: to learn; to seriously weigh the factors involved; to come to a reasoned, carefully thought out decision; and to vote.
“So, when I have conversations in my congregation, or with delegates, or with trustees, what should I be focusing on?” Outstanding question! I’m glad you asked.
Remember that the board put this issue on the agenda for a couple reasons:
1. to get a lot more people involved in the discussion of what is the right thing to do in this case, and
2. to get all of us to focus on our principles in making important decisions like this one.
So, a few questions to stimulate your thinking:
- Which of our principles is in play here? One of them was specifically called out in the motion; are there others?
- The board decided that we want to make a statement opposing the new Arizona law. What’s the best, most effective, way to do that? Should we take our money and go elsewhere? Should we stay in Phoenix and make a visible public witness opposing the new law? Some other action?
- Does it matter that, if we move away from Phoenix, the UUA will have to pay just over $600,000 for defaulting on existing hotel contracts? Or, should principle overshadow any monetary cost that might be charged?
- What would you tell our members who are concerned for their personal safety in Phoenix?
- Does it matter that several other organizations have moved major meetings away from Arizona? For example, the following organizations have moved:
• The United Church of Christ has moved their 2011 SW conference meeting.
• The Immigration Lawyers Association has moved their national meeting.
- Whichever way you have decided, what would change your mind?
- What are the long-term policy issues when it comes to future GA sites? Should we avoid cities that:
• Have adopted laws we find oppressive of minority populations?
• Have adopted laws against marriage equality?
• Have recently been the target of ICE ([Federal] Immigration and Customs Enforcement) raids?
• Have particularly poor environmental records?
• Others?
BOTTOM LINE: We want to make a reasoned, carefully thought out, decision on how to proceed. If you can participate at GA in Minneapolis, great. If can’t make it to GA this year, please ensure you’re your delegates know your thoughts.
Also, please let me know (lphinney@uua.org) so that I can participate on your behalf.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Special Board Meeting
Well, after much research, conversation, questioning, contemplation, some gnashing of teeth, many questions, and lots of disgust at the actions of the Arizona legislature and governor, the UUA Board determined last night to propose a resolution for consideration at General Assembly in Minneapolis to move General Assembly 2012 to a location outside of Arizona.
Here’s the resolution:
“Whereas the state of Arizona has recently enacted a law, SB 1070, that runs counter to our first principle, affirming the worth and dignity of every person,
Whereas the Association stands in solidarity with allies using a widespread economic boycott of Arizona as leverage for Love against this hateful legislation;
Be it resolved: we will not meet in a state of fear.
Accordingly, the Assembly hereby:
• Directs the UUA General Assembly Planning Committee to recommend to the Board of Trustees an alternate location for General Assembly 2012 at a location outside the state of Arizona;
• Pledges to generate from Member Congregations the amount sufficient to cancel arrangements in Phoenix for GA 2012;
• Pledges further to generate an equal or greater amount to fund ongoing efforts to Stand on the Side of Love in Arizona.
• Pledges to renew and redouble our efforts to become a multicultural, anti racist Association; to live as a people standing faithfully in opposition to systemic racism in our congregations, local communities, and in our own lives.”
So, what happens next? The resolution above will be on the GA business agenda. Delegates will be asked to vote on this resolution. However prior to any vote, delegates will have the opportunity – no, the obligation -- to learn:
• about the new law,
• its anticipated affects,
• the financial affect on our association of defaulting on existing contracts with hotels in Phoenix,
• the nature of the fund raising commitment involved in this resolution (to cover our own costs as well as support for “Standing On The Side of Love in Arizona,”
• the views of leaders of the Phoenix UU congregations and of the Pacific Southwest District,
• et cetera – there’s a lot involved here.
Please, discuss these issues within your congregations. In my next blog entry, I’ll summarize, as best I can, the various factors that the Board wrestled with. Hopefully, all this will lead to discussions among delegates, members of congregations with each other, delegates with their congregations, members and congregations with your respective UUA trustees.
DELEGATES: Come to Minneapolis prepared: to learn; to seriously weigh the factors involved; to come to a reasoned, carefully thought out decision; and to vote.
Here’s the resolution:
“Whereas the state of Arizona has recently enacted a law, SB 1070, that runs counter to our first principle, affirming the worth and dignity of every person,
Whereas the Association stands in solidarity with allies using a widespread economic boycott of Arizona as leverage for Love against this hateful legislation;
Be it resolved: we will not meet in a state of fear.
Accordingly, the Assembly hereby:
• Directs the UUA General Assembly Planning Committee to recommend to the Board of Trustees an alternate location for General Assembly 2012 at a location outside the state of Arizona;
• Pledges to generate from Member Congregations the amount sufficient to cancel arrangements in Phoenix for GA 2012;
• Pledges further to generate an equal or greater amount to fund ongoing efforts to Stand on the Side of Love in Arizona.
• Pledges to renew and redouble our efforts to become a multicultural, anti racist Association; to live as a people standing faithfully in opposition to systemic racism in our congregations, local communities, and in our own lives.”
So, what happens next? The resolution above will be on the GA business agenda. Delegates will be asked to vote on this resolution. However prior to any vote, delegates will have the opportunity – no, the obligation -- to learn:
• about the new law,
• its anticipated affects,
• the financial affect on our association of defaulting on existing contracts with hotels in Phoenix,
• the nature of the fund raising commitment involved in this resolution (to cover our own costs as well as support for “Standing On The Side of Love in Arizona,”
• the views of leaders of the Phoenix UU congregations and of the Pacific Southwest District,
• et cetera – there’s a lot involved here.
Please, discuss these issues within your congregations. In my next blog entry, I’ll summarize, as best I can, the various factors that the Board wrestled with. Hopefully, all this will lead to discussions among delegates, members of congregations with each other, delegates with their congregations, members and congregations with your respective UUA trustees.
DELEGATES: Come to Minneapolis prepared: to learn; to seriously weigh the factors involved; to come to a reasoned, carefully thought out decision; and to vote.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
UUA April Board meeting
Yes, it’s blogging time again – the UUA Board has met and it’s time to write about it. As usual this was a packed agenda.
We received a report from John Hurley, the UUA Director of Communications. We had asked him to come talk with us for a variety of reasons. What emerged from the discussion will be a much enhanced Board presence on the web. There are many details to be worked out, but expect the Board page on the uua.org site to look a lot different, soon. Also, we are contemplating creating a Board Blog and exploring how FaceBook could be used to keep everyone better informed about the workings of the Board. I’ll let you know when it’s time to become a “friend” of the Board.
The Commission on Appraisal made a presentation requesting that their budget, as it appeared in the draft that was released about a month ago, be restored to its more robust former size. The Board examined the preliminary budget for both the Commission on Appraisal and the Commission on Social Witness and restored some of what they requested. Everyone acknowledged the present economic situation in which we all find ourselves.
Some time ago I wrote about the Board’s commitment to transforming our governance structure. During the Board meeting, several trustees met with leaders of the District Presidents’ Association to plan a pre-GA meeting that will include members of the UUA Board, members of district boards, key members of the UUA Staff, our president, the Rev Morales, and our moderator, Ms Courter. This is an important meeting that is key to the success of this transformation. It’s just not possible to reorganize the governance of the association without the involvement and acceptance --- no, that’s not enough --- without input and assistance from district leaders and key members of the UUA staff. Unfortunately, I wasn’t one of the trustees involved in that meeting. I intended to be in that meeting, but proved, once again, that I can’t be in two places at once. Much more, probably immediately following the pre-GA meeting.
We received a report from John Hurley, the UUA Director of Communications. We had asked him to come talk with us for a variety of reasons. What emerged from the discussion will be a much enhanced Board presence on the web. There are many details to be worked out, but expect the Board page on the uua.org site to look a lot different, soon. Also, we are contemplating creating a Board Blog and exploring how FaceBook could be used to keep everyone better informed about the workings of the Board. I’ll let you know when it’s time to become a “friend” of the Board.
The Commission on Appraisal made a presentation requesting that their budget, as it appeared in the draft that was released about a month ago, be restored to its more robust former size. The Board examined the preliminary budget for both the Commission on Appraisal and the Commission on Social Witness and restored some of what they requested. Everyone acknowledged the present economic situation in which we all find ourselves.
Some time ago I wrote about the Board’s commitment to transforming our governance structure. During the Board meeting, several trustees met with leaders of the District Presidents’ Association to plan a pre-GA meeting that will include members of the UUA Board, members of district boards, key members of the UUA Staff, our president, the Rev Morales, and our moderator, Ms Courter. This is an important meeting that is key to the success of this transformation. It’s just not possible to reorganize the governance of the association without the involvement and acceptance --- no, that’s not enough --- without input and assistance from district leaders and key members of the UUA staff. Unfortunately, I wasn’t one of the trustees involved in that meeting. I intended to be in that meeting, but proved, once again, that I can’t be in two places at once. Much more, probably immediately following the pre-GA meeting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
