Sunnyhill Board of Trustees is proud to announce our latest way to communication with the congregation. We have a BLOG.
Just click this link http://sunnyhillboard.blogspot.com/ to get the most current happenings at Sunnyhill at the board level.
We will update it often so subscribe to the blog or check back often. Thank you - the Communications Team (Amy Kent, Lee Young, Louise Machinist and Sibyl McNulty)
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Simplicity Circle Recycles Electronics Responsibly during Garage Sale
Simplicity wants to make sure that the electronics we inherit during the garage sale will be disposed of responsibly since most will not sell (if history is any indicator). We have found Agreenspan, a local recycler, who will dispose of electronics in an environmentally-responsible manner. Since this will cost us a few bucks we are passing on this charge as a drop-off fee during the garage sale, see list below. Most “free” collection events unwittingly send these electronics overseas into cyber-age waste dumps where computers are burned emitting toxic fumes, micro-chips are washed in acid baths and then dumped into local rivers. The fees will be collected on the honor-system; an instruction sign, drop-off fee pricelist, and cash box will be at Sunnyhill’s front door during the garage sale drop-off. Please contact Elizabeth or Charlie with any questions.
MONITORS $10.00
PCs, PRINTERS, FAX MACHINES, SCANNERS, LAPTOPS $5.00
KEYBOARDS, CABLES, MICE, SPEAKERS, CELLULAR PHONES No Charge
TELEVISIONS
The following prices are a guide to recycling charges for television sets.
Screen size- measure glass diagonally Recycling fee
15” or smaller $20.00
Over 15” but less than 27” $30.00
27” but less than 36” $40.00
36” and above (TABLE MODELS) $ 50.00
Floor models (wooden cabinets,
on wheels,etc,) $ 50.00
WE DO NOT PUT TELEVISIONS INTO LANDFILLS NOR DO WE SEND THEM OVERSEAS AS SCRAP TO BE STRIPPED AND LEFT AS POLLUTION. PLEASE BEWARE SO CALLED ‘RECYCLERS’ WHO DO NOT CHARGE FEES FOR ANY CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) MACHINE (TVs AND COMPUTER MONITORS). THEY CANNOT BE PROPERLY DISPOSED OF FOR FREE.
The Recycling Lie
“We may think we’re doing the right thing by giving our old electronics to a ‘recycler’ or a free collection event,” said Sarah Westervelt, BAN’s e-Stewardship Program Director. “But most of those businesses calling themselves recyclers are little more than international waste distributors. They take your old equipment for free, or pocket your recycling fee, and then simply load it into a sea-going container, and ship it to China, India or Nigeria.”
Once on foreign shores your old computer or TV becomes part of a cyber-age horror story. In China, woman and children breathe in the toxic solder vapors as they cook circuit boards, dioxins are produced when wires are burned, and micro-chips are washed in strong acid baths and flushed into the rivers as primitive metals extraction techniques take their toll on the local environment and the health of thousands of migrant farmers. In Nigeria the imported techno-trash that is not repairable is dumped and burned in swamps. BAN revealed these sad truths as early as 2002 in their film and report “Exporting Harm: The High Tech Trashing of Asia” and again in another report and film entitled “The Digital Dump: Exporting Re-use and Abuse to Africa," in 2005.
Unfortunately, according to BAN and ETBC, this ugly waste trade continues unabated from the United States because the government refuses to ratify the Basel Convention and the Basel Ban Amendment – international accords prohibiting trade in hazardous waste to developing countries, and has otherwise expressed little interest in controlling its toxic waste exports as long as they are claimed to be destined for recycling or re-use. As such, US e-waste exports are in contravention of international law, but not US law, and thus US “recyclers” are able to claim they abide by all environmental laws and are even "EPA approved".
Doing the Right Thing: The e-Stewards Initiative
To help distinguish between these unscrupulous exporters and the responsible recyclers and refurbishers, BAN and ETBC created the e-Stewards Initiative – a program identifying North America’s most responsible e-Waste recyclers that have agreed to adhere to strict criteria created by the non-profit environmental groups. The criteria require that no hazardous electronics equipment or parts (as defined internationally) will be exported to developing countries or be processed by captive prison labor, and that none of it will end up in landfills or incinerators. These responsible recyclers can be found at: www.ban.org/pledge1.html or www.computertakeback.com/responsible_recycling/index.cfm. Consumers are urged to avoid recyclers not on this list including free e-waste collection events that do not state that they only use e-Stewards recyclers.
“We strongly urge all consumers to avoid all but those recyclers that have qualified as e-Stewards. If your local recycler has not qualified for the program, ask them to do so. Otherwise while trying to do the right thing with recycling, you can unwittingly become a player in a global digital dumping game, and end up poisoning those in developing countries,” said Barbara Kyle, National Coordinator of ETBC.
For more information contact:
Sarah Westervelt at BAN in Seattle: 1.206.652.5555, or swestervelt@ban.org.
Barbara Kyle at ETBC in San Francisco: 415-206-9595, or bkyle@etakeback.org.
For photographs of electronic wastes dumped in Africa and China: http://www.ban.org/photogallery/index.html
For more information on the horrors of e-waste export read the reports Exporting Harm and The Digital Dump, found on the Basel Action Network website: www.ban.org
For a list of responsible recyclers/refurbishers (e-Stewards): http://www.ban.org/pledge1.html
ATTN. Editors: Many newspapers and media outlets have been promoting recycling of electronics without paying attention to what the "recyclers" really do with the waste. Please be cautioned against helping promote free collection events or local recyclers that are not vetted as being non-exporters. Please call us if you have any questions in this regard.
MONITORS $10.00
PCs, PRINTERS, FAX MACHINES, SCANNERS, LAPTOPS $5.00
KEYBOARDS, CABLES, MICE, SPEAKERS, CELLULAR PHONES No Charge
TELEVISIONS
The following prices are a guide to recycling charges for television sets.
Screen size- measure glass diagonally Recycling fee
15” or smaller $20.00
Over 15” but less than 27” $30.00
27” but less than 36” $40.00
36” and above (TABLE MODELS) $ 50.00
Floor models (wooden cabinets,
on wheels,etc,) $ 50.00
WE DO NOT PUT TELEVISIONS INTO LANDFILLS NOR DO WE SEND THEM OVERSEAS AS SCRAP TO BE STRIPPED AND LEFT AS POLLUTION. PLEASE BEWARE SO CALLED ‘RECYCLERS’ WHO DO NOT CHARGE FEES FOR ANY CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) MACHINE (TVs AND COMPUTER MONITORS). THEY CANNOT BE PROPERLY DISPOSED OF FOR FREE.
The Recycling Lie
“We may think we’re doing the right thing by giving our old electronics to a ‘recycler’ or a free collection event,” said Sarah Westervelt, BAN’s e-Stewardship Program Director. “But most of those businesses calling themselves recyclers are little more than international waste distributors. They take your old equipment for free, or pocket your recycling fee, and then simply load it into a sea-going container, and ship it to China, India or Nigeria.”
Once on foreign shores your old computer or TV becomes part of a cyber-age horror story. In China, woman and children breathe in the toxic solder vapors as they cook circuit boards, dioxins are produced when wires are burned, and micro-chips are washed in strong acid baths and flushed into the rivers as primitive metals extraction techniques take their toll on the local environment and the health of thousands of migrant farmers. In Nigeria the imported techno-trash that is not repairable is dumped and burned in swamps. BAN revealed these sad truths as early as 2002 in their film and report “Exporting Harm: The High Tech Trashing of Asia” and again in another report and film entitled “The Digital Dump: Exporting Re-use and Abuse to Africa," in 2005.
Unfortunately, according to BAN and ETBC, this ugly waste trade continues unabated from the United States because the government refuses to ratify the Basel Convention and the Basel Ban Amendment – international accords prohibiting trade in hazardous waste to developing countries, and has otherwise expressed little interest in controlling its toxic waste exports as long as they are claimed to be destined for recycling or re-use. As such, US e-waste exports are in contravention of international law, but not US law, and thus US “recyclers” are able to claim they abide by all environmental laws and are even "EPA approved".
Doing the Right Thing: The e-Stewards Initiative
To help distinguish between these unscrupulous exporters and the responsible recyclers and refurbishers, BAN and ETBC created the e-Stewards Initiative – a program identifying North America’s most responsible e-Waste recyclers that have agreed to adhere to strict criteria created by the non-profit environmental groups. The criteria require that no hazardous electronics equipment or parts (as defined internationally) will be exported to developing countries or be processed by captive prison labor, and that none of it will end up in landfills or incinerators. These responsible recyclers can be found at: www.ban.org/pledge1.html or www.computertakeback.com/responsible_recycling/index.cfm. Consumers are urged to avoid recyclers not on this list including free e-waste collection events that do not state that they only use e-Stewards recyclers.
“We strongly urge all consumers to avoid all but those recyclers that have qualified as e-Stewards. If your local recycler has not qualified for the program, ask them to do so. Otherwise while trying to do the right thing with recycling, you can unwittingly become a player in a global digital dumping game, and end up poisoning those in developing countries,” said Barbara Kyle, National Coordinator of ETBC.
For more information contact:
Sarah Westervelt at BAN in Seattle: 1.206.652.5555, or swestervelt@ban.org.
Barbara Kyle at ETBC in San Francisco: 415-206-9595, or bkyle@etakeback.org.
For photographs of electronic wastes dumped in Africa and China: http://www.ban.org/photogallery/index.html
For more information on the horrors of e-waste export read the reports Exporting Harm and The Digital Dump, found on the Basel Action Network website: www.ban.org
For a list of responsible recyclers/refurbishers (e-Stewards): http://www.ban.org/pledge1.html
ATTN. Editors: Many newspapers and media outlets have been promoting recycling of electronics without paying attention to what the "recyclers" really do with the waste. Please be cautioned against helping promote free collection events or local recyclers that are not vetted as being non-exporters. Please call us if you have any questions in this regard.
Monday, May 26, 2008
Pointers to recources
These are articles to which I think members should have direct access on our website or blog, and I am submitting them for your consideration.
This is a library of UU resources:
The following are specific articles from the above that I think would be worth specifically noting separately:
This is a congregational self-assessment protocol;
This is a by-law review protocol;
This is a policy governance model.
Thank you for your attention and any consideration you may give to the above.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
Next Forum
The US Army operates a center at Ft Leavenworth Kansas called "the finest learning center in the United States of America." We will watch the Commandant explain how the Army is now training the troops in "Nation Building" whereas just a few years ago, one politician mocked the previous President (Clinton) for using the Army for such activity.
We will also watch part of an interview with Gen. Petraeus where he relates some of the complications of the occupation of Iraq. The lesson to be learned from both officers is how well educated, perceptive and well spoken they are compared to the civilians to whom they must answer.
This will be in Room 25 at 10:15
Ken
We will also watch part of an interview with Gen. Petraeus where he relates some of the complications of the occupation of Iraq. The lesson to be learned from both officers is how well educated, perceptive and well spoken they are compared to the civilians to whom they must answer.
This will be in Room 25 at 10:15
Ken
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Big Meeting and APT results are delivered
The Sunnyhill Service auction was as much fun as a day at the beach. It was held on Saturday night.
Sunday night the community gathered to get the results of the Action Planning Team in the next step of the 'bridge building process.'
The congregational meeting is next week.
Sunday night the community gathered to get the results of the Action Planning Team in the next step of the 'bridge building process.'
The congregational meeting is next week.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Herb's idea for a new group
I am interested in hearing from those who are interested in forming a member-driven discussion group regarding who we are as UUs and what we expect from UUism and Sunnyhill.
In order that there be no misunderstanding, I will first state that I am specifically not interested in offering an alternative to the bridge building process. For full disclosure, I will state that I remain unconvinced that the bridge building process is responsive to the needs of our congregation. Our needs are both transactional and transformational; the consultant's report is limited in scope, whether intended or not, to transactional change. It addresses issues necessary to correcting management errors of the past but does not go beyond this aspect to address the core issues of defining who we are as a congregation and what will fulfill our congregational identity.
I will participate in the bridge builder process primarily as an observer and commenter, not because of the value of the process but because of the value of being aware of the state of the process. I will not be disruptive but I will not silently stand by if I see the process as contributing to advancing a forgone agenda from either within this congregation or from the UUA.
That said, I would like to meet with persons who would like to discuss what we expect from being a UU. I cannot be specific in an agenda because I want those who come to bring their own issues and perspective free from the necessity of having any prefixed limits on their concerns. One of my own concerns is do we need a minister at all, another is what, if any, relationship should we have to the UUA. I am stating these not because they should be the agenda, but as examples of transformational issues as opposed to transactional issues such as who should be the minister or how much dues we should pay the UUA. I hope that such examples would encourage others to look at fundamentals and to speak freely in an atmosphere not burdened by an outside agenda.
In order to be clear, I would like to specify that the group would be free ranging as it desires in considering issues, but only issues. I am not looking for the group to be a management alternative or to be mission driven. There are plenty of other opportunities for action driven agendas. Of course, participants may gain ideas or learn of allies for taking action within the congregation, but that would be a derivative benefit of the group, not a directed intention.
For those of you who feel more comfortable knowing I didn't invent a non-agenda driven group, I am copying the model of Calvin Pava, of the Harvard Business School in looking at Task Complexity (High/Low) and Conflict (High/Low), and am using the Quadrant 4 model, Nonsynoptic Systems (High Complexity, High Conflict). It's set forth on Page 151 Leading Change in the Congregation by Gilbert Rendle. It's characteristics are that it uses unclear objectives, imprecise methods, encourages disorderly action, and uses tacit emphasis on changing the system.
Finally, I have been doing a little reading in Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma aspects of game theory, and will use my conclusions from the material to set the following standard for forming and continuing the group: I will meet as long as there are two other individuals willing to meet for two meetings, or two additional meetings once the group forms. In forming or continuing the group I will give no weight to the approval or disapproval of any non-participant, whether or not they occupy any position of authority in the church. I will terminate the group if, and only if, it does not meet the stated standard. This is not a hostile statement, it is a clarity statement.
If anyone is interested, please let me know.
Herb Caponi
In order that there be no misunderstanding, I will first state that I am specifically not interested in offering an alternative to the bridge building process. For full disclosure, I will state that I remain unconvinced that the bridge building process is responsive to the needs of our congregation. Our needs are both transactional and transformational; the consultant's report is limited in scope, whether intended or not, to transactional change. It addresses issues necessary to correcting management errors of the past but does not go beyond this aspect to address the core issues of defining who we are as a congregation and what will fulfill our congregational identity.
I will participate in the bridge builder process primarily as an observer and commenter, not because of the value of the process but because of the value of being aware of the state of the process. I will not be disruptive but I will not silently stand by if I see the process as contributing to advancing a forgone agenda from either within this congregation or from the UUA.
That said, I would like to meet with persons who would like to discuss what we expect from being a UU. I cannot be specific in an agenda because I want those who come to bring their own issues and perspective free from the necessity of having any prefixed limits on their concerns. One of my own concerns is do we need a minister at all, another is what, if any, relationship should we have to the UUA. I am stating these not because they should be the agenda, but as examples of transformational issues as opposed to transactional issues such as who should be the minister or how much dues we should pay the UUA. I hope that such examples would encourage others to look at fundamentals and to speak freely in an atmosphere not burdened by an outside agenda.
In order to be clear, I would like to specify that the group would be free ranging as it desires in considering issues, but only issues. I am not looking for the group to be a management alternative or to be mission driven. There are plenty of other opportunities for action driven agendas. Of course, participants may gain ideas or learn of allies for taking action within the congregation, but that would be a derivative benefit of the group, not a directed intention.
For those of you who feel more comfortable knowing I didn't invent a non-agenda driven group, I am copying the model of Calvin Pava, of the Harvard Business School in looking at Task Complexity (High/Low) and Conflict (High/Low), and am using the Quadrant 4 model, Nonsynoptic Systems (High Complexity, High Conflict). It's set forth on Page 151 Leading Change in the Congregation by Gilbert Rendle. It's characteristics are that it uses unclear objectives, imprecise methods, encourages disorderly action, and uses tacit emphasis on changing the system.
Finally, I have been doing a little reading in Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma aspects of game theory, and will use my conclusions from the material to set the following standard for forming and continuing the group: I will meet as long as there are two other individuals willing to meet for two meetings, or two additional meetings once the group forms. In forming or continuing the group I will give no weight to the approval or disapproval of any non-participant, whether or not they occupy any position of authority in the church. I will terminate the group if, and only if, it does not meet the stated standard. This is not a hostile statement, it is a clarity statement.
If anyone is interested, please let me know.
Herb Caponi
Friday, March 28, 2008
SUUSI 2008 catalog | SUUSI
SUUSI 2008 catalog | SUUSI SUUSI 2008 catalog
The SUUSI 2008 catalog will be bulk mailed at the end of March. Until you receive your copy, or if you would prefer an electronic copy, you can download the catalog below.
SUUSI 2008 catalog - without registration forms (2.3 MB)
Monday, March 24, 2008
FORUM
For March, the Forum will be the video of Charlie Rose interviewing the author of the book: The Shock Doctrine, the Rise of Disaster Capitalism followed by the usual discussion.
Naomi Klein says: “The best time to push through these very unpopular economic policies is in the aftermath of some kind of crisis or shock” and giving numerous examples.
Share in the exchange of ideas during LifeCraft at 10:15 am on Sunday, March 30, 2008, in Room 25.
Naomi Klein says: “The best time to push through these very unpopular economic policies is in the aftermath of some kind of crisis or shock” and giving numerous examples.
Share in the exchange of ideas during LifeCraft at 10:15 am on Sunday, March 30, 2008, in Room 25.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Greek organizers kindle backup Oly torch - Sunday March 23, 2008 12:52PM
We light this ...
SI.com - Olympics - Greek organizers kindle backup Oly torch - Sunday March 23, 2008 12:52PM: "a Greek actress in the white gown and sandals of a pagan high priestess used a backup flame lit at a rehearsal on Saturday.
That flame will be sent to China if storms forecast for Monday scuttle the official lighting ceremony beside the 2,600-year-old Temple of Hera in ancient Olympia.
'We hope the weather is good tomorrow,' Culture Minister Michalis Liapis said.
Clouds spoiled the ceremony for the 2000 Sydney Olympics and the last three Winter Olympics.
But bad weather is not the only headache for the mock-ancient ceremony's organizers -- who took the rare step of moving Monday's event an hour back to avoid rainstorms."
Sunday, March 09, 2008
Bridge Building Forums
For those who have something to say and for those who want to learn.
Tues: 3-11-08 from 6:30 to 9:30 pm
Wed: 3-12-08 from 6:30 to 9:30 pm
Sat: 3-15-08 from 9:30 to 12:30 pm
Sun: 3-16-08 from 1 to 4 pm
Just show up.
Tues: 3-11-08 from 6:30 to 9:30 pm
Wed: 3-12-08 from 6:30 to 9:30 pm
Sat: 3-15-08 from 9:30 to 12:30 pm
Sun: 3-16-08 from 1 to 4 pm
Just show up.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
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.
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.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
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 |
Friday, February 22, 2008
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.
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.
Monday, February 04, 2008
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.
° 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.
Sunday, February 03, 2008
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.
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.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
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.
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.
Friday, January 11, 2008
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
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
Thursday, December 27, 2007
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)