This Super Delegate Loves to Swim

A member has passed

There is some sad news that is headed out in an email. Or, call the church for details.

Religious Education Committee — Catherine P, Chair

Starting February 1st 2008, the RE Committee took on the role of running the RE program until the new DRE is hired (target date August 1, 2008). The committee consists of Catherine (chair) , Bob and Beth H, Bruce K, Denise O-K, Cheryl K, Judy K, Marina L, and Geneva. Amy serves as the Liason from the Board. One of the primary activities of the committee is to coordinate the activities beyond Religious Education Classes.

The Harvest Festival was hosted by Lisa P; Spring Festival will be hosted by Geneva and Judy; and Secret Friends is being coordinated by Catherine. Bob and Beth are the liaisons from the Youth Group to the RE committee and participated in a very successful Italian dinner (fundraiser for NEED).

Susan R and Lynn Acquafondata took over coordination of the Coming of Age program in February and that will culminate with a COA service in May.

Our Whole Lives (OWL) will be offered again next year for our 9th and 10th graders.

Denise is the Children /Youth Choir Director. Marina directs the Sunnyhill Youth Orchestra which has played opening music and special music at services.

The RE committee members also provide much of the summer RE volunteer teaching and help recruit others to fill these slots. Geneva and Amy will provide a full lesson plan for each summer Sunday this year which is very helpful to volunteers.

Bonfire

Come, stretch out on a blanket and be mesmerized by the flames, expanse of sky, and good company. We hope to see you there!

BONFIRE 2008!!

It’s time again for our "open-house" spring bonfire at our acreage in Washington County! We'd like you to come and bring anyone with whom you'd like to be (1). It’s on Saturday, March 29 from 2:00 PM until after dark, so come and go whenever you like. We plan to light the bonfire at around 2:30, watch the flames roar up, then let the fire collapse as it burns into the evening. Meanwhile, there's power-sitting, hiking in the woods, chopping logs, climbing trees, modified baseball (2), dog play, roasting food, eating s’mores, - and maybe we can sing as we have down in the early bonfire years. Friendly dogs are welcome, too, as are kites, musical instruments, sports gear, etc.

We provide the basics (3) such as water, some chairs, s'mores (4), and hot dogs with options from vegan to carnivore. You may want to bring blankets, lawn chairs, and clothing for all seasons (5). And, if you have some tree parts that you want to get rid of, just bring them and throw them on the fire.

See the attached map to get to ‘Playland’, our 13 acre property on Welsh Road in Chartiers Township, Washington County. That is approximately 10 minutes west of the Meadowlands Racetrack and McDonalds. It’s rustic: no plumbing, no electricity --- and few restrictions (6).

In case of very extreme weather (i.e. a lot of wind or rain), it may be postponed to Sunday afternoon. Please call us to determine this: the weather is frequently different there, than in Allegheny County. If you RSVP, we will know with whom to get in touch in case of questionable weather.

Just in case you get lost on the way to the bonfire, we recommend you bring our cell phone numbers with you. Also, feel free to call (or email us before 12:30) about the weather situation or anything else.

(Phone #s DELETED by BLOG Owner)

Peter and Denise

(1) Adults must give consent, according to my stalkee.

(2) The open terrain is a little rough and sloped.

(3) Shovel and toilet paper included.

(4) Graham crackers, marshmallows, and chocolate bars.

(5) One year the weather went from T-shirt weather to a blizzard in the same day.

(6) Just in case, dress for poison ivy: long sleeves and pants.

directions.jpg 315K View Download

Film 'East of Liberty' to screen Saturday at Allegheny UU

Friday, February 22, 2008, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Filmmaker Chris Ivey will screen his film "East of Liberty: A Story of Good Intentions" at 7 p.m. tomorrow at the Allegheny Unitarian Universalist Church in the Central North Side.

"East of Liberty" documents the struggle that residents and business owners have witnessed in East Liberty's current resurgence of development. Tickets are $5 at the door. A discussion will follow.

A wine and cheese reception before the film at 5:30 p.m. will raise funds for the third installment. Tickets are $50 and are available by calling 412-901-8026. Reservations are limited; cash and checks are accepted.

The second part of the trilogy -- "East of Liberty: The Fear of Us" -- will premiere soon.

Core Team for Bridge Building is starting to assemble

Invites are going out to those willing to serve on the larger team. What that would mean is:

° Attending a work session with the consultant on February 17 from 3 p.m. through into evening

° Co-facilitating at least two focus groups between Feb. 17 and the end of March, each requiring at least two hours

° Summarizing the results of each focus group and sending them to the Core Team within a day or two after the focus group

There are more details, of course. The list of 12 people (invitation only) is to be finalized by Tuesday morning.

BRIDGE BUILDING from the realm of Herb Caponi

Herb Caponi wrote in an email to the community:

I do not feel that Bridge Building, as it has been presented, is an adequate instrument for resolving or even addressing the issues present at Sunnyhill. Specifically, it seems to be substituting therapy for effective leadership or effective management of church affairs. In terms of systems theory, I believe it will be a self-reinforcing system rather than a self-limiting system, increasing rather than reducing existent problems.

I resent the imposition on my time and energies in being involved in this process. However, not participating in a major church activity, no matter how ill conceived I view it to be, is not an acceptable option. I propose that we should examine structure and organization rather than pursue therapy.

We cannot address or resolve issues if we do not know the issues. As best I can determine from the only resource available to most of us, rumors and hearsay, there are two major issues.

The first is a dispute between the Minister and former Director of Religious Education regarding the role of religious education at Sunnyhill. Dispute resolution is a skill required of all professionals; however, absent a resolution between the Director of Religious Education and the Minister, the by-laws are clear that the Director of Religious Education reports to the Board, not to the Minister. The Board did not meet its duty to the congregation in not resolving this issue when it first appeared. The DRE operates independently of the minister, and the Board should defer to her judgment absent demonstrated cause to overrule her.

The second issue is alleged mistreatment of some church members by the Minister. I do not have any first hand information regarding this issue, and do not feel it appropriate to address it in factual terms but do feel it can be addressed in principled terms. I do feel that it is the Board’s responsibility to investigate the facts of this issue objectively and to present a reasoned fact-based recommendation to the congregation. I am not sure it is practical or even necessarily beneficial to investigate what are now aged allegations of misconduct, but others are certainly welcome to present contrary points of view. I do not say this out of any lack of sympathy for the feelings of those involved, but out of a lack of knowledge of what has happened and the impact on those involved. It is obvious from the consequences that the issues are significant.

I do not mean to slight anyone individually, but do feel obliged to state that early effective action by the Board could have resolved both issues before we reached the current state of affairs. That said, we still need a Board to run the everyday business of the church, so I cannot see requesting the Board to resign. We cannot retrieve the failed opportunity to have resolved these issues at their beginning; however, we can look to the future and determine our options from here forward. I feel that this is an opportune time to be looking at the fundamental structure of the church.

The three reasons to come to Sunnyhill which I have heard since being here are “spiritual”, religious education for children, and the companionship of interesting and agreeable persons. I put spiritual in quotes because despite diligent search, I cannot find a definition that does not encompass some form of supernaturalism, stated or implied. However, we cannot neglect the needs of those who find the word helpful to define the needs Sunnyhill fulfills for them. These needs seem to be, at least in part, the ministerial components of the minister’s function. My question is can we structure a way of meeting these needs other than the historical approach of a separate position for minister and director of religious education? I believe that we should look at combining the functions into one position for directing both adult and children’s programming and religious education. I do not include program presentation as part of the duties of this position but do include program planning.

Obviously this idea cannot be fully explored in a memorandum such as this one, but looking at who we are and what we need as a congregation has to begin somewhere. Questioning the structure is to me more important than presenting a finished plan at this time. There are other resources for those functions that are strictly ministerial. Absent the minister’s salary, we could afford speakers and get far more wide ranging points of view than any one individual minister could present. We have committees and lay people to reach out to those going through stressed periods of their lives. The local humanist organization, Center For Free Inquiry-Pittsburgh has services available for ministerial functions, such as weddings, funerals, etc. I do not speak for them but would be willing to ask them to present their available services to the church. A look at what resources are available cannot but be beneficial.

Restructuring the functions presently filled by separate positions for the Minister and Director of Religious Education into one position has more than the obvious budgetary advantages; it has the advantage of one resource person being responsible for addressing our needs as a congregation with consequent accountability. It also has the advantage of substituting an educational and program role for an implied or assumed power role relationship in the congregation.


I wish to specifically note that I do not propose this idea as a back-door way of firing our current minister. I think that for ethical and practical reasons we should honor the original term of the contract. The justifications for terminating a contract before its terms expire are generally lack of work, lack of funds, just cause, or gross incompetence. The ministerial position does not currently seem to lack enough work. If we are unable to fund the position, then what? The need is still there. Just cause requires, in my mind, clear and convincing evidence of misconduct; gross incompetence requires clear and convincing evidence of being unable to perform the requisite duties of the position. If the evidence exists for just cause or gross incompetence, bring it forth in an appropriate forum.

I do feel that the present level of dissatisfaction justifies deciding now not to renew the contract at its termination; it may establish gross incompetence.

I also wish to specifically note that I do not feel that a part-time minister is the solution unless it is considered on its non-financial merits after due consideration for that specific purpose. A part time minister still does not resolve the issue of power relationships in the congregation. Unitarians tend not to grant power over themselves to others without examination and justification. The existence of a minister position at all is for me a blanket granting of authority that has no reason for existing.

I think that we have to examine the authority mechanisms of hiring and firing for all positions. I was rather surprised to learn that the Board cannot hire or fire the minister. The congregation does not interview the candidates for the position, and has little choice but to defer to the judgment of those who do. The lack of Board authority to dismiss the minister coupled with the unreasonably high requirement for a dismissal by the congregation is effectively giving the minister the ability to function without accountability. This is an unacceptable interpretation of using democracy to conduct church affairs. The By-Laws should be amended to grant this authority to the Board for future employees. If the Board shows a disinclination or inability to deal with the responsibility, running for the Board is the solution that fulfills conducting church affairs by the democratic process.

For future reference, for any position in the congregation, I see neither need nor value in long term contracts. A one-year contract with an acceptable renewal clause should work nicely, and is rather common.

In addition to examining the personnel structure, I think that an issue that should be addressed is replacing the building with a modern structure designed for the purpose of being a church. The present building necessitates two services, a practice that fragments the congregation and limits expanding life craft. The number of meeting rooms also causes frequent scheduling problems due to the limited meeting space. Again, the issue cannot be adequately explored in a memo, but I feel it should be raised and considered. Effective long term financial planning, in addition to budget planning, is a corollary to this issue.

Another issue that I feel should be explored is the value and role of the UUA. The UUA may be a legitimate resource to the church, but the justification for that eludes me. I see the UUA as “corporate” trying to impose their formulaic vision of Unitarianism. Currently, the UUA has also provided a means of looking to a third party source for resolving issues that we should be addressing ourselves. In addition, the delays consequent to involving the UUA have allowed the problems to accelerate.

I think that we need to examine our relationship with the UUA specifically to determine if it has grown into an unexamined authority with power we never intended. There may be legitimate value in the UUA, but I feel that we would be better off as a congregation if we were convinced of that after an examination process.

We cannot help but benefit by examining our structure, regardless of the ultimate outcome.

Sunday forum at 10:15 am, Sunday at Sunnyhill -- LifeCraft

During the televised Republican debate on November 28 with questions raised via YouTube, this question was asked: "To Christian conservative candidates, on the death penalty, what would Jesus do?" The answer was avoided by Mike Huckabee with: "Jesus was too smart to ever run for public office" which was followed by a round of laughter both by the other candidates and the audience. The question was not answered even when repeated by the moderator.

Is that retort acceptable? If yes, what does it say about any Christian politician? If not acceptable, why not?

There will be a 25 minute presentation by Ken Wagner about why politics is not serving our republic as represented in comments made by or about Mike Huckabee and others. Then there will be a discussion to complete the hour tomorrow during Lifecraft in the Forum at 10:15 am.

Get BridgeBuilding Letters/Emails/Phone calls to Richard by Feb. 1

“How do you see things (“what is your take”) on where Sunnyhill is right now in its life and ministry?” All members and friends are invited to send their answers to our UUA BridgeBuilding facilitator at:

Rev. Dr. Richard Speck, District Executive
100 West 10th Street, Suite 1008
Wilmington, DE 19801
302-778-4564
302-778-4590 (fax)
302-528-3762 (cell)
302-239-6286 (home)
rspeck@uua.org

Jan 6 meeting about bridges N@

BRIDGE BUILDING PROCESS

Kick Off Meeting Sunday January 6th at 6:30pm

Building bridges between our divisions

I reach out to you won't you reach out to me?

With all of our voices and all of our visions

Friends we could make such sweet harmony.

From Hymn #1023 in the Singing the Living Tradition, Supplement



FAQs : Before Building Bridges: from the Sunnyhill Board



1. What is the Bridgebuilder process and why are we doing it?

Anxiety and conflict exist in all systems, and of course churches are no exception. The Bridgebuilder process was created by Peter Steinke, a well-known church consultant and author of several books on church conflict. After working with hundreds of churches experiencing the effects of conflict, Steinke created a process for assisting churches in working through their anxiety and moving in the directions they want, toward health and growth. The process was recommended to our church by Rev. Joan VanBecelaere, the District Executive (DE) of the Ohio Meadville District of the UUA, after meeting with our board of trustees and staff.

The process may look familiar at first. It begins with a congregational meeting and a dialogue led by Richard Speck, the consultant we will be working with. He is the DE for the Joseph Priestley District and has been trained in conducting the Bridgebuilding Program. Interviews and written surveys are part of the process as well. However, unlike Sunnyhill's previous experience, this process is on-going and will continue to involve the congregation in meaningful and essential ways over several months. It will also include an action plan, written by members of the congregation and presented to the entire congregation for implementation.

2. Didn’t we just go through a process like this with Tom Chulak and Jean Crane? I’ve given my comments on our situation several times over the past few years. Why should I do it again
if nothing seems to change?

The issues we are grappling with have developed over time. Levels of awareness of these issues have also changed over time. At different stages, the board, the staff, and the congregation have taken various action steps in response to these issues.

The Bridgebuilding process is the next phase, a phase that will empower the congregation to identify and to address critical issues so that we can become a healthy congregation with a healthy ministry.

The BB process will build on input, comments and perceptions that have emerged at earlier stages.

These will inform the Bridge Building process at all steps.

We sincerely hope that everyone in the congregation will engage fully in the BB process in the spirit of love and hope.

3. Why shouldn’t we call a congregational meeting to vote on whether or not to retain the minister before we embark on a new process?

The board carefully considered this option. We concluded that in the long run, regardless of the outcome, such a vote taken at this time would be more disruptive to the fabric of the congregation. No matter how the vote turned out, the congregation would need to go through a healing process such as that offered through the BB program. Embarking on the BB will enable the congregation to address the question of retaining the minister, to deal with any other issues we as a congregation identify, and to begin the critical process of healing.

4. Why can’t we facilitate the BB or some other healing process amongst ourselves?

It is true that within our congregation we have talented, experienced people with strong facilitation skills. As members of the congregation, some of these people may have already developed strong feelings and opinions about our current situation, while others may not have. However, it is very likely that no one is truly perceived by all others as being completely neutral. The benefit of the BB process is that it brings in an outside neutral facilitator to act as a non-anxious presence within a very anxious congregation.

5. As a representative of the UUA, won’t the facilitator be biased toward the minister?

The facilitator is clear on his role of serving the congregation, with the goal of having a healthy congregation with a healthy ministry.

6. What will this cost Sunnyhill?

Sunnyhill’s cost for the BB program will be $1,000. All other costs, including the balance of the facilitator's fee ($2,000) and his travel and lodging expenses,will be covered by the OMD and the UUA. In addition, the OMD District Executive will be involved in this process with no cost to the congregation. This demonstrates the OMD’s and the UUA’s support of and commitment to our congregation during these difficult times.

The UUCSH Board of Trustees hopes to see ALL Sunnyhill Members and Friends at the Kick Off Meeting Sunday January 6th at 6:30 pm

Childcare will be Provided.

An Open Letter to the Sunnyhill Community

(From John H):

I am writing this letter to the entire Sunnyhill Community as both an expression of personal frustration and as a plea for action which I believe must taken to resolve the crisis now dividing and embittering this community. It is only one person's opinion – I make no claim to speak for anyone else. But I can no longer, in good conscience, remain silent. I have chosen to do this by letter in order to avoid unnecessary emotion and allow for timely reflection.

When I first came Sunnyhill a little over two years ago I was fascinated and amazed by the delightful diversity, intensity and collective brilliance of this relatively modest grouping of people. It was an experience which had heretofore been missing from my life. I was at once amazed and totally reenergized to have found all of you. And, perhaps even more important to me, to have been so readily and quickly accepted as a fellow in your company – a relationship about which I feel as strongly as ever, and one which I want to endure.

Unfortunately, the ongoing discontent concerning the relationship of the minister to the congregation and congregation to the minister is casting a grey pall over all of us, to the point where it threatens to destroy the very institution of community that is Sunnyhill. At the time I joined the church, I was unaware of the roiling discontent within the congregation. Since then, the atmosphere has darkened considerably and it saddens me immeasurably to see this cancer continuing to spread through the community. The recent status letter concerning this year's pledge canvass makes it clear that the conflict is beginning to impact the capacity of the organization to function in some very real and soon to be painful ways. Along with the missing pledges, the many empty seats at services in recent weeks is a tell-tale sign of the crisis – and the problem of activity space is no longer the burning issue it was as recently as a year ago.

Problems of this nature are not altogether uncommon in churches. What is uncommon is that we have permitted it to persist at Sunnyhill for such a long time – to fester without any serious or effective effort to bring it to a head. It is never easy to confront such demons and I know, as a liberal congregation, we don't want to injure anyone's feelings; but, in the process of avoiding difficulty and injured feelings, we risk imminent self-destruction.

Last spring's "Conversations", coming as they did on the heels of an apparently poor evaluation of the minister, clearly identified that we are a church in "extreme crisis", with, at that time, fully 25% of the congregation identifying the minister as the source of discontent. Considering that 7% discontented membership constitutes a "problem church", it should then have been crystal clear to the Board that something serious and tangible needed to be done immediately. Yet, still, the Board elected to sit on it for almost another year – until the blow-up following the " Power and Authority" sermon forced them to look up from their visioning to once again confront the persistent reality confusion and discontent in their midst.

As far as I can determine, the entirety of the current distress revolves around the minister and her job performance over the past four years. The congregation is confused, confounded and frustrated because the Board has consistently refused to provide it with the information necessary to fully understand and respond to the problem – insisting that confidentiality and secrecy took precedence over congregational awareness and understanding. Instead of acting forcefully and decisively to address the situation, the Board has chosen to "punt" – delegating its responsibility to UUA third-parties in search of what can only be described as soft-core feel-good solutions. The results to date: increasing angst and anger among the congregation; fewer members; three new Board members; substantially reduced pledges; and the promise of more of the same to come. This is not being responsible, it is being cowardly.

The Bylaws state that the Board is responsible for performing an annual evaluation of the minister and is responsible for "creating and enforcing the employment contract with the minister" and, further, that the minister can only be dismissed, upon motion, by a two-thirds vote of the congregation present at an Annual or Special Meeting of the Congregation. Thus, the Board can and, in my opinion, must apprise the congregation in a timely fashion of the results and the contents of its annual evaluation of the minister – prior to the Annual Meeting – particularly if the evaluation is marginal or unsatisfactory. While the Board is charged with performing the evaluation and managing the employment contract, it is solely the responsibility of the congregation, when asked, to determine whether the minister should stay or go. This congregational responsibility can not be exercised responsibly without specific knowledge of the issues involved, and this can only be provided by the Board of Directors.

Why is the Board afraid to bring the matter to a head and trust the congregation to act in the best interest of the church? Why are we being subjected to another soft-headed feel-good approach – bridge-building – when what we need is to address the problem directly and specifically? Why has the Board failed and refused to perform the required annual evaluation in 2007? And why is the Board unwilling to share the information it has concerning the specific issues and the results of the 2006 evaluation with the congregation? The congregation has an absolute right to this information – and the Board a duty to provide it. The congregation is, after all, the actual employer. These issues should be confronted, discussed and debated openly, not in hallway whispers, furtive phone calls and e-mail rumors. There is no need to include personal information, confidentially provided; but specific types of complaints and instances of behavior and performance can and should be formally aired to the congregation – not during or following Sunday services, but at one or more special congregational meetings called by the Board.

I strongly suspect the answer to the above questions is that the Board is afraid that if it brings this information and these issues directly to the congregation and requests a congregational vote to retain or dismiss the minister, the congregation will vote to retain. And if it be so, so be it – the congregation will have spoken. But whether the congregation decides to retain or to dismiss, the issue will be, at least for the moment, settled. Everyone will know the facts and just where one another stands on the matter – then we can begin to move forward together again. It is at this juncture, and only at this juncture, that something like bridge-building might be beneficial.

I fully appreciate the difficult position the current Board of Directors finds itself – three new members thrown into the breach and escalating internal strife in the community – but more delay and delegation will not settle anything. I do not, by this criticism, mean to in any way denigrate the efforts and sacrifice each and every Board member has made during this extended process, nor minimize the personal pain and toil each has put into her or his duties as Board members. I am certain that what was or was not done by the Boards (present and past) was in good faith and belief that it was in the best interest of the church – it's just that they appear to have been in conflict avoidance mode, not problem solving mode. In order to get back on track again the Board must recognize that, given the proper information, the congregation can be trusted to do what is in the best interest of itself. It must, in good faith, share the information it possesses relating to the job performance of the minister – good as well as bad. Finally, it must allow the congregation to be the final judge – not the UUA or the Ohio-Meadville District or some other third-party consultant.

Should the Board elect to change its current course, the task ahead will most certainly not be easy or painless, but it is an essential part of the process if the community is to survive as a vital organization retaining the wonderful blend of diversity, intellectual ferment and caring concern I have come to know and love since discovering Sunnyhill. Writing this letter has been a sad and painful task, but I can't sit back and see the community tear itself apart because too many of us are unwilling to step up and say enough is enough – it's time to move on. More importantly, I don't want Sunnyhill, and you, to stop being a part of my life.

Thanks very much for taking the time to read and contemplate these thoughts.

John Hemington

---

Then comes the first reply:

John,

I believe your statement as follows summarizes the problem as it now stands:

This congregational responsibility can not be exercised responsibly without specific knowledge of the issues involved, and this can only be provided by the Board of Directors.

My suspicion regarding bridge building is that we are repeating the Pittsburgh history of building bridges to nowhere.

Having no complaint about Lynn myself (I do have some problems with the position of minister existing at all, but that is a separate issue), I have been extremely frustrated at trying to determine the specifics of discontent. What I have heard, if true, warrants dismissal. However, I have heard what I have heard from third parties, not from the grievants themselves.

Ordinarily, the lack of any specifics to contribute to an informed determination slants me toward ignoring a subject. However, the real world effects cannot be ignored if we wish Sunnyhill to survive. The Board, in seeking third-party intervention, is providing the proverbial straw to a drowning person. The Board has not even provided the minimum action of an annual ministerial evaluation, which is its duty. The neglect or refusal to complete the ministerial evaluation is anywhere from an abdication of responsibility to outright manipulation of the situation. In any case, I now see the Board itself as an obstacle, not a resource, regarding any solution to the current problems.

My question is, lacking an effective Board, what are our options . One, of course, is individual resignation, which more people seem to be exercising. I care nothing about Sunnyhill as a corporate entity, but I absolutely do not wish to sever myself from Sunnyhill as a community. I feel that the Board, in its failure to effectively deal with the situation, has caused the loss of this community to those who have left, and the loss of them to those of us remaining. I suspect there are others who simply stop coming without the formality of announcing it, which are opportunity losses to both them and us.

Another option is to request the Board resign en masse, and call for immediate elections. This would provide members who feel they have a solution to present it to the congregation. I don't see this as a positive action only because, even if it could be done, we need a Board because Sunnyhill is a business that requires management authority. Leadership in the current situation, if it comes, will come from the congregation, not the Board.

Another option is to repeat the founding of Sunnyhill, and form a separate church/society, with or without the blessing of corporate Unitarianism. This is not as outlandish as it seems, as we seem to have distinct groups notwithstanding the issue of the minister, and the talent for organization certainly exists. I have heard several people state they have no to little need of a minister, and would be open to separating with a group of like-minded individuals. Are there at least 10 (or more) people open to discussing this?

I myself feel that a congregational meeting not chaired by the Board or third-party representatives is the next best step before looking at other options. As the distribution list for your email is hidden, I am copying everybody in my list that I can identify with Sunnyhill. Is there any interest in this?

Note-I accept responsibility for any anger this email and its general distribution may cause, but accept no credit for any positive responses, as these things are merely what someone needs to say.

Herb Caponi

---

Lynn was thought to have posted in email in response:

Herb and all,

I urge you to trust the board (for at least the next month). Take the time to show up and see what this Bridge Building process is about and what it actual brings us before criticizing it. If the process is a total failure you can act at that point. However the board has been working very, very hard. For months they have been taking the things they know about the situation at Sunnyhill and combining that with their learnings about the possible ways to help the congregation through this crisis. I trust the board. True, they aren't perfect. None of us are. However, I urge all of you to trust that their combined wisdom will lead us somewhere worthwhile. At very least please give them a chance for the next few weeks.

Thank you,

Lynn

---

Jay P, President of the UUCSH Board wrote:

Wow, I must say I am struggling with how much of this to respond to. I think there is a lack of understanding as to what Bridge-building is. I take responsibility for that. We have perhaps not been effective at getting the message out. What it is NOT is the board getting someone else to do our job. An outside facilitator leads us to both describe all our problems (of which not having a written evaluation of the minister I submit is only a very small part) and then also assists us in leading our own dialogue among members to create an action plan to deal with all of our problems. I submit that if an internal person (of which we have many very talented people who could do this) would not be considered by all as unbiased. Unfortunately the current climate to me indicates that we MUST have an outside party facilitate our working through this. If an action plan includes voting to release our minister, so be it. I would remind you that last spring Tom Chulak reported that in his conversations with over half our congregation, he concluded that 25% of us had serious issues/problems/complaints with the minister. While that is an extremely high percentage, if a vote had been taken then to dismiss the minister, it would have failed. Our bylaws require a 2/3 majority present at a congregational meeting to dismiss. Do you suggest that if we hold a vote now to dismiss the minister, either way the vote goes, all our problems go away? I suggest that is extremely naïve and shallow thinking. Maybe then the “losers” of that vote would then voluntarily leave. Is that what we want? Are we not capable of working through our disagreements? Or maybe it isn’t worth the trouble. Am I reading of a suggestion to dismantle Sunnyhill and start all over? I suggest that we are all still here because we do NOT want that to happen. Do you suggest that if we evaluate the minister, our problems go away? Please.

The suggestion is being made that we begin making the minister’s evaluations public. That is a strong argument. Personally I disagree, but it is certainly worth talking about. Let me remind everyone of the communication I sent through a letter last spring as well as an article in the drummer recently. John, I also talked to you personally on November 3rd regarding many of the issues you have spoken about. As I told you then, and through public communication, the board has been working on shoring up some organizational weaknesses that we have been living with for quite a while. A clear and structured process for evaluating our staff is only a very small part. Making both the minister and DRE evaluations public should be part of that discussion. There is clearly a lot of support for that. This was one piece of the work that THIS board took on last spring. Unfortunately it had to be put on hold because the uproar caused by the “Power and Authority” sermon in October necessitated the board change its focus.

There seems to be an implication that this board loves secrecy and is working in the dark to further its own, shadowed agenda. Please. We have neither the desire, nor the energy that would take. Sunnyhill is facing some unprecedented challenges and we are trying to figure out how to deal with them. You present arguments concerning minister evaluations as if we have been purposely keeping information from the congregation. Last year, to my knowledge was the FIRST time a minister from Sunnyhill has had a formal evaluation. I’m not sure how it worked when Kirk was here so I can’t really speak to that. I also know that something was written for Lynn to be considered “settled”. Sunnyhill has been in existence for over 40 years! This was never a problem until a couple of months ago. Do you want us to change something like that on a dime simply because you write a letter? We have also received criticism concerning putting people on to the board agenda. In the past, this has not been a problem, and frankly I love to have people share their concerns with the board in person. But we are not working in the same environment as we have in the past. In the past, the board did not routinely have 10-15 people show up at its meetings to observe. There is much more tension, less understanding and compassion, and more formality. That is ok. We will work under the conditions that we have to. That’s why we were elected.

I would encourage everyone to participate in the Bridgebuilding process beginning on January 6th. If after that initial meeting you feel your concerns will not be addressed, then you of course will not be forced to participate. If you want to drive your own process, then you are certainly within your rights to do so adhering to our by-laws. I would hope though that everyone be engaged in the same process, because unless we as a whole congregation are working together to achieve the same goals—a strong loving, supportive community, then we are going to continue to bleed members, and foster anger and resentment. And that will be a very sad legacy to the many remaining founding members who started this organization we call Sunnyhill.

Jay Pullen
President, UUCSH board of trustees

---

Then comes the final letter via email in this chain. Others are free to post in the comment area. The blogmaster scrubbed the idenity of this person who sent in the letter as he was not interested in following along in the conversation. Hint: He is a former board member and ex-president of the board.

Jay:

... blog posting removed...
NAME NUKED

If you wish, you can chime in with the comments on this blog. But, there is little insurance that anyone will read the postings as this blog gets few viewers.

Budget Preview

Sunnyhill's 2008 Budget Preview is slated for 11:30 on December 30 (following the one service) and at 10:15 on January 6, 2008 (between the two services). These meeting happen in the Main Room to discuss the 2008 budget with interested members of the congregation.

It will be an opportunity for members to offer suggestions for which appears to be a financially difficult year. Before this meeting members will have the draft budget proposed by the Board available which will be distributed before the end of 2007. To create this draft budget, the Board has had to make some difficult choices in the face of what is anticipated to be significantly lower pledge income in 2008. It is hoped that as a result of this meeting, the congregation and Board will be in agreement regarding the choices that need to be made and why they need to be made ahead of the budget approval meeting two weeks later on January 20.

The initial proposed budget will be made available by this weekend. There will be copies available in the Dining room Sunday.

Earth Day vendors and speakers wanted

Sunnyhill's Earth Day Committee is looking to locate speakers, vendors, exhibitors and/or workshops about or related to the positivity of the earth for Sunnyhill's Earth Day Celebration on Saturday April 26th, 2008 from 10 am - 5 pm. Information or questions should be directed to Victoria Dym at vicdym -at- hotmail -dot- com.

Unitarian Universalist Humour

Unitarian Universalist Humour: "HOW MANY (xxxxxx) DOES IT TAKE TO CHANGE A LIGHT BULB?"

Randy Bellamy, Facilitator, Current Events Discussion Group writes:

Well, we'll be sandwiched in between the two services once again, which is our usual scheduled meeting time following Labor Day and prior to Memorial Day. We'll meet twice monthly and USUALLY we'll meet in room #25. And so, life begins again with our having a chance to review, thrash out, rant and thoughtfully compare and contrast our concerns and views within a friendly framework which you'll find both challenging and congenial.

These times are complex and challenging, and demand our becoming more clearly focused and better informed. Please join us as we attempt to reach informed conclusions of what we will and will not tolerate, of what matters and what we will or may dismiss. During each of our biweekly considerations of events, which are certainly among Pittsburgh's liveliest, we will attempt, through discussion and debate, to gather perspectives and resolve needed to face the demands made upon each of us. I hope you'll come and make your own contribution to the continuing discussion.

Open Letter to Unitarian Universalists

There is no "if" about the President's abuse of the First Amendment. As a 14 year Marine veteran I've seen the results when one religion is favored over another.

Take a look at reaction and information about recent actions by the Supreme Court.

http://www.lawmemo.com/sct/06/Freedom/
http://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/homepage/article.cfm?id=6106
http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?caseno=05-1130&submit=showdkt
http://ffrf.org/legal/legal2.php
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/06-157.ZS.html

My letter is meant to be a wake up call.

To date Unitarian Universalists and the UUA have not joined in any coordinated action against the ecclesiastical administration of the United States on Faith Based initiatives.

The UUA came out opposing the nomination of Samuel Alito to the supreme court in December of 2005 and we went as far as a letter of opposition.

http://www.uua.org/pressroom/pressreleases/14622.shtml

What can we do now besides say, "We told you so."

So far I've not been able to find any Church groups or bodies that are joining this fight.

http://www.secular.org/

The closest on their web site is the society for Humanistic Judaism
http://www.shj.org/.

We Unitarian Universalists have democracy at the very core of our belief system. We respect the inherent worth and dignity of every individual in their search for spiritual fulfillment. If we stand on the sidelines we are not only accepting whatever theocracy the current or future administration has or have but are allowing an alliance of two branches of the government to over rule the third.

What do you all think of the actions of the President and the Supreme Court?

If we can't beat them should we Joining them to get our "fair share"? (Yes that is meant as Sarcasm.)

Or do we band together to return the separation of church and state to the first secular government in the world?

If we chose the latter as the high ground how do fund the fight?

I know our church could not afford a battle independently. But is this something that we pay UUA dues for?

Bob Lee
UUCSH (AKA Sunnyhill)
Pittsburgh, PA

First Friday meeting covers the movie, Sicko

First Friday will meet at 7:30 pm on September 7, 2007 at Sunnyhill.

The topic will be Sicko, the new film by Michael Moore. Some have hailed it as his best and most professional film, others have labeled it as only a showpiece for his biased views.

Previous to the film's showing 33% of Lion's Gate (the distributor) stock was sold to a doctor. The number of theaters showing the film was cut from 1600 to 400 one week
before the release. Could this have been a coincidence? We will discuss the related
health care issues. Whether or not you have seen the film, come and give us your opinion. The meeting will start at 7:30 pm with recommendations regarding movies, plays, concerts, books, restaurants, etc. that you believe the group would enjoy. As usual, bring a snack and beverage to share.

UU Church sign draws attention

Kerry may have to ketchup - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
SIGNAGE. Members of the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Ligonier Valley didn't realize they'd gain nationwide notoriety when they put up a banner on their church, nestled along Route 30 in Ligonier Township, to attract new members.

The sign has drawn the curious attention from one of television evangelist Pat Robertson's disciples, Lee Webb, an anchor at Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network.

In an opinion column posted last week on the channel's Web site, Webb posted a photograph of the banner.

"My family and I passed a Unitarian Universalist Church while we were vacationing in Western Pennsylvania last week. Displayed on the front of the building was a banner that read, "A Beacon of Liberal Religion," Webb wrote.

"I've driven by a lot of churches over the years, but never one so proud of its liberalism," Webb added.

Webb reports he was so "intrigued" by the banner's declaration, he visited the church's Web site and was surprised that its pride "in its unorthodoxy runs deep."

"Sad, isn't it? Is it any wonder, then, that liberal Protestant denominations are losing members in droves?" Webb asks.

The church pastor, the Rev. Dr. Renee Waun, said last week that Webb's lumping the local congregation into a liberal Protestant denomination "is like comparing apples and oranges."

"Basically, we're a new church -- only 3 years old -- and the sign is to show people what we are offering. The comments are almost absurd. ... We have a lot of members in our congregation who remain strong to the Christian faith," she said.

Dean's Diner

Cheers is where everybody knows your name, but at Dean’s Diner, they know your name, your financial status, and they don’t care. Join us on June 22, 2007 at 8 pm, or June 23 at 2 pm and 8 pm, and you’ll see what we mean. Dean and Vicky will be there, along with the Senator, a musician who can’t sing, a pregnant woman who can, and other assorted strange people. There’ll be pie, too.

Of course, everything is bartered.

Admission is free, in exchange for a donation to the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. The pie is free, in exchange for 5 dollars. Laughs are free, in exchange for telling us how good we are.

Sign-Up for Sunnyhill Conversations

Please take part in Sunnyhill Conversations that will be held at Sunnyhill May 13, 14, 15, & 16. There is a sign-up sheet posted in the dining room and all members and friends are invited to take part. If you can’t make it to Sunnyhill to sign-up, you may phone Elizabeth during her office hours at church 412-561-6277 to schedule a time. Please DO NOT leave her a voice mail. Feel free to speak to a Board member or COM member if you have any questions and don’t forget to attend the Congregational Meeting on Wed, May 16 at 8:00!