What does an ex officio member DO anyway?

One of my surprises after agreeing to run as a candidate for the PCD trustee position was that I was expected to attend more than the 4 annual UUA Board meetings and additional associated sub-committee meetings. I automatically became an ex officio ("by virtue of one's position") member of the Pacific Central District Board, which also meets at least 4 times per year (and more like 6). This actually makes a lot of sense - if I represent the District, and the Board is elected by the District, there should be a strong linkage.

So what does an ex officio member do anyway, except in this case not vote?

As I listened to the conversation at the PCD Board meeting last Saturday in the beautiful UU Fellowship of Santa Cruz County sanctuary in Aptos, it occurred to me one of my most important functions might be to insure that the two Boards I am on actually understand each other's positions and logic. Not necessarily agree, but definitely understand.

So with that in mind, here are some of the comments from the PCD Board on issues currently under discussion by the UUA Board.

Somewhat to my surprise, the Independent Affiliate (IA) topic had more energy around it than the theological funding issue, but that may have been because it was first. Most PCD Board members disagreed with the underlying criteria by which IAs were now being evaluated:
"We appear to be shoving them away rather than bringing them in."
"Why would we diminish the impact of Unitarian Universalism by pushing people away? Don't we need all the allies [with common values] we can get?"
"Most of these groups are too small to have a national presence or work with individual congregations"
"Many of these groups may not have credibility to work with local congregations without national affiliation."

There was particular concern about the retired ministers' group not being affiliated:
"They have served their congregations and their faith for years [but now that doesn't count]"

Around the funding issue, there were some strong views on the need for a UU view to be inculcated into our ministers, with belief that could be done best at our own schools. There appeared to be a general sense that there should be accountability on the part of the schools for how funds were spent, but there was greater concern about the quality of the ministers being trained.
"We are asking the wrong questions. We see far too many seminary candidates who do not have a call to serve - it is all about them."
"Something is broken at screening and recruitment."
"We appear to have more work towards anti-oppression than parish ministry."
One board member indicated his opinion might change based on what percentage of the students from Starr King and Meadville Lombard became UU ministers.

The PCD Board is a group of hard working, intelligent people who care about Unitarian Universalism. All of us had other things to do rather than attend another meeting. But we did so willingly, in a collegial atmosphere with respect and kindness towards each other, punctuated by laughter. May it continue to be so.

Entering the new land

Greetings from one of the newest trustees of the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations Board, representing the Pacific Central District. This includes Northern Nevada, Northern California, and Hawaii. I use the full title of the UUA because I am impressed with the degree to which the Board defines itself as being about support of the congregations, as you will see below. I have no doubt my inexperience will lead to errors of interpretation and fact on this blog, so will invite all you readers to keep me honest!

Board Meeting One was just two and a half hours long for us "newbies", as the six incoming board members left at 10:30 to join a (very good) day and a half workshop on anti-racism/anti-oppression training, joining other UUA leaders from the Nominating Committee, Commission on Social Witness, and District Presidents. Even in that short time, it was clear that at least two issues would be somewhat controversial: financial support for theological education and the status of affiliates to the UUA Board. Both areas reflect what appears to be a shift in thinking.

The rationale behind the review of affiliate status is described in this open letter to the leadership of Independent Affiliates. In essence the letter affirms the UUA as an "association of congregations" and that the purpose of the affiliation should be to directly serve the congregations and/or encourage them to work together to achieve their goals, rather than be an independent voice for a particular issue or cause. Affiliates can reapply should their mission/charter change to reflect a more direct intent to serve congregations, particularly working with other organizations with common goals.

Financial support for theological education is around a recommendation to shift to "funding of ministerial formation, development, and excellence [as] the first priority...rather than the current singular focus on support for the theological schools". There are two UU theological schools: Starr King in Berkeley and Meadville Lombard in Chicago. A 10% reduction in funding for the 2008 fiscal year was approved, with those funds to "clearly articulate a vision for the ongoing use of Theological Trust Funds for Unitarian Universalist ministerial formation, development, and excellence".

Why would the UUA reduce funding to our two seminaries? There are clearly valid concerns around any loss in funding such as identified in this Letter from the Starr King School for the Ministry and I anticipate talking with many people about this over the next few months to insure I am an educated participant. I did find a conversation with Rev. Rosemary Bray McNatt helpful. She is one of the other incoming Board members (and a speaker at Rev. Christopher Craethnenn's ordination) who has been part of the study panel and is a former member of the Starr King Board of Trustees. The proposed reductions in general operating funds may or may not mean pulling funds from these schools, but rather providing the funds for programming that is specific to Unitarian Universalism. Apparently 65-70% of UU ministers are actually trained in other seminaries than Meadville Lombard or Starr King, just as at least some of the Starr King and Meadville Lombard may be non-UUs. Is there a way to use our financial resources to further education that is specific to the development of UU excellence, rather than the basics of being a minister? Should some of the funds be used to support UU thinkers in higher education that will continue to develop our faith?

These questions (and more) will be debated over the next few months and years - let me know your views!