Winter 2011 Congregational Meeting, Jan. 16

by Posted in Board Minutes, Congregational Meeting Documents

Please attend the January 16, 2011 Congregational Meeting at 1:30 pm in the Sanctuary! Childcare may be arranged by sending an email to .

The following materials are available here for your information prior to the meeting:

Congregational Meeting Postponed

by Posted in Board Minutes, Congregational Meeting Documents

The congregational meeting scheduled for Sunday December 12, 2010 at 1:30 pm has been postponed until Sunday, January 16, 2011 at 1:30 pm in the Sanctuary.

Please mark your calendar for this very important congregational meeting. We will be deciding on the final budget for First UU. Additionally, there will be a discussion of whether or not to move ahead to hire a volunteer coordinator. Much thoughtful discussion and thought has gone into this issue. It is important that every member of the congregation be present for this meeting to make important decisions that will affect your future.

Childcare for the Congregational Meeting may be arranged by sending an email to childcare@austinuu.org.

The following materials are available on the church web site for your information:

June 2010 Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes

by Posted in Board Minutes Tagged

First Unitarian Universalist Church of Austin, Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes

Tuesday, June 21st, 2010 at 6:30 p.m.

First UU Church of Austin, 4700 Grover, Austin, TX 78756 in the Gallery

In Attendance:

Trustees: Eric Stimmel, President; Chris Jimmerson, Vice-President; Kae McLaughlin, Treasurer; Beverly Donoghue, Assistant Secretary; Nell Newton, Immediate Past President (Ex-Officio), Margaret Borden; Eric Hepburn; Brendan Sterne; Susan Thomson; Michael West.

Executive Team: Janet Newman, Interim Minister (Ex-Officio); Sean Hale, Executive Director (Ex-Officio)

Staff Present: Brent Baldwin, Director of Music; Lara Douglass, Director of RE

Visitors Present: None

Call to Order

The President called the meeting to order at 6:37 p.m.

Adoption of Agenda

The Trustees present adopted the agenda (Appendix, page 1).

Motion: Chris Jimmerson — Adopt the agenda.

Second: Michael West

Discussion: None

Vote: All affirmative

Reading and Lighting of the Chalice

The Interim Minister led the Trustees in reading in unison the Board covenant (Appendix, page 2), and the President lit the chalice, which was colorfully decorated by the Stimmel family – and inscribed with “Open Minds – Listening Ears – Loving Hearts.”

Visitor’s Forum

No visitors were present at the meeting.

Consent Agenda Items

The Trustees had read the consent agenda items (Appendix, pages 3-20) prior to the meeting.

Motion: Chris Jimmerson — Adopt the agenda.

Second: Brendan Sterne

Discussion: None

Vote: All affirmative

Discussion and Action Items – Governance

See Appendix, page 21, for Governance Principles.

Speaking with One Voice: The President referenced a recent flurry of contradictory e-mails on the same topic and proposed that he should be the first to respond to questions e-mailed to the Board. He could direct the question to the appropriate Board member or to the “justboard” list-serve. The Board member(s) would respond to the President, and he would respond to the questioner. The goal is to simplify e-mail communications.

Process Evaluation/Observation Roles: The Vice-President noted that the Board is not fully into policy-based governance and that not all Board members have been trained in policy-based governance. He proposed having a timekeeper for each meeting, and he volunteered to be the timekeeper for this meeting. He suggested that all Board members should fill out the Meeting Monitoring Guide (Appendix, page 22) and have a five-minute discussion on observations at the end of each Board meeting. He also proposed that one Board member would review Board members’ comments on the Meeting Monitoring Guide and report back at the next meeting. The Vice-President volunteered to review the monitoring comments and report back at the July Board meeting.

The Trustees discussed the following:

It is best to take two minutes to discuss the meeting immediately afterward, including what aspects need improvement. Members could use exception review. If Trustees are unsure about an item, they can pay more attention to it in the future.

Additional questions submitted by Joe Sullivan are on page 23 of the Appendix.

The Meeting Monitoring Guide has too many questions and is overwhelming. However, the Guide is good as a reminder, and perhaps over time Trustees will become accustomed to using this meeting evaluation format.

The discussion will be about the process. More roles may be added later after the Trustees have been trained by Joe Sullivan.

The Vice-President noted that during a recent conference call, Joe Sullivan, the policy governance consultant, discussed getting the philosophy of governance ready to vote on in July. He suggested taking the list of items, refining the list like Nell and Janet did with the covenant, and presenting it at the July Board meeting.

Reflection on Board Retreat: Brendan Sterne noted that a lot of work was accomplished at the June 12th retreat. The focus was on accuracy, and there is more to do, but he observed that Trustees demonstrated a superb use of time. Joe Sullivan also thought the retreat was very productive and that many parts are happening with the Governance Transition Plan (Appendix page 24). The Trustees reviewed the plan’s tasks, timelines, and task assignments and made the following comments:

Wordsmithing the Nested Bowls – in next 2 weeks? — Rose Ann Reeser, Brendan Sterne, Nell Newton, Chris Jimmerson, and Margaret Borden.

Nested Bowls provide the context for values. Narrowing down the values, mission, and ends to make more poetic.

The Nested Bowls team will ask for Trustees to review and comment on significant edits.

The Vice-President suggested that when people e-mail their edits to follow the President’s “one voice” policy.

2.Board meeting to approve the Nested Bowls? — No, the July Board meeting is two days after the July 18th service.

3.Prepare for the July 18th service — Chris Jimmerson, Nell Newton, and Margaret Borden.

One Trustee suggested giving the congregation the retreat handouts the Trustees received to show how the Board reviewed these comments to distil the essence of the congregation’s ideas.

Another suggestion was to display the actual posters created during the visioning sessions so the congregation could see before the service that all their comments were considered.

Eric Hepburn volunteered to help with planning the July 18th service.

Brendan Sterne’s first child is due July 18th, so all Trustees should be ready to help as needed with this important service.

4.Produce Philosophy of Governance statement – by July Board meeting — Brendan Sterne, Chris Jimmerson, Susan Thomson, and Klondike Steadman (Governance Task Force)

The governance philosophy will be a model since it will continue to be refined after the July meeting.

5.Declaring Policy-based Governance as our model – by July Board meeting

6.Prepare Governance Transition Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) – by July 18th service – Governance Task Force

7.Select example policy sets for Board to study — by August Board meeting – Governance Task Force

8.Schedule a community/leadership policy governance session (to be held in September?) – in the next 2 weeks? – Governance Task Force

This event will roll out policy governance to congregational leadership, and Joe Sullivan will be present.

Should this event be for current leadership or anyone who is interested?

Trustees need to pick the date soon since Joe Sullivan’s calendar fills up fast after General Assembly.

October 10th is the All-Council meeting so this meeting could be used for the policy governance session. October 10th is also the middle of the Stewardship Campaign. Last year’s campaign used 50 people, so there is a lot of cross-over. Perhaps the All-Council meeting should be held in September.

9.Schedule a Board policy-writing picnic (to be held in November?) – in next 2 weeks? – Governance Task Force

The Executive Director will be out of the office November 6th through 13th.

Saturday, November 20th is the proposed date, with the hope that Joe Sullivan will be available that day.

10.Look at bylaw revisions – commissioned in October, report to Board by February? — Bylaws Task Force (to be appointed)

11.Determine Executive Model – by August Board meeting

Trustees’ discussed the following considerations about the timing of this task:

Timing is driven by the ministerial search timeline.

The Governance Task Force could present their recommendations at the August Board meeting or at the July meeting.

The ministerial candidate will be in Austin in the spring. The Executive Model needs to be part of First UU Church of Austin’s packet for ministerial candidates.

Trustees discussed the pros and cons of specifying the governance model before the settled minister arrives:

Why commit to one model before reviewing candidates? The model should be flexible, depending on the candidates we are most interested in.

Deciding the Executive Model in advance narrows the decision on ministerial candidates too much. Some ministers want to be the single contact for the Board.

Joe Sullivan’s view is that the Executive Model should be decided by the congregation in advance and should be very clear to candidates about authority, responsibility, and executive structure.

Ambiguity about the Executive Model may set us up for difficulties when it is unclear and we end up negotiating what the Executive Model will be with the ministerial candidate.

It is unfair to candidates to be unclear. We need to specify a set of skills that we are looking for. Candidates need to know whether we want a Chief Executive Officer or a shared executive.

Role assignments may change when you add a new person to the mix.

We know ourselves best and what will work best. We will decide on the model based on what seems to be the best fit for now. The Board can change its mind or tweak the model in five years. It is important for Trustees to present a united front.

We need to know the process for developing recommendations for the Board in August, and the Executive Director needs to be included in the process.

Trustees noted the following resources for designing the Executive Model:

UUA’s Stefan Jonasson

survey of large churches

Joe Sullivan

the Executive Director/Administrative Task Force that developed the initial model.1 Cindy Raab will be asked to participate.

A liaison from the ministerial search committee, so they know the Executive Model decision is not an arbitrary one.

Sharon Moore, who has been an Executive Director before – Susan Thomson will invite Sharon to work with the governance task force before the July Board meeting.

12.Support Stewardship Campaign – Fall

The actual campaign is during the month of October.

The President applauded Brendan Sterne for his diligent work on the Governance Transition Plan, but expressed concern that the Board might be trying to do too much too fast. He questioned whether the intense schedule might lead to volunteer overload. The Vice-President suggested that the timeline could be pushed back to July-August. He also suggested that Joe Sullivan should be brought in as a consultant to assist with items 3 and 6, planning for the July 18th service and developing the Policy Governance FAQs.

Board reflections on the retreat included:

What Trustees came up with during the retreat was exciting.

Thanks to Trustees for cleaning up.

Michael LeBurkien found his gifts, could not tell a meeting had been held at his house, found Kae’s briefcase, and prefers the Board’s furniture arrangement to his own.

There was such good teamwork

Appreciation for the Board’s enthusiasm and how they cranked out their ideas

Pulling out the values simplified the mission statement.

It really helped that Joe Sullivan kept reminding the Board to keep it succinct.

Joe Sullivan and Laura Park, head of Unity Consulting, were very impressed with the Board’s work. He was surprised that the Board got further than most churches he’s worked with.

The Interim Minister noted that the Board knows how to cooperate. The challenge is to translate that cooperation to the congregation and community.

Presentation of Mission to Congregation: Chris Jimmerson, Nell Newton, and the other Nesting Bowls wordsmiths will refine the poetry and precision of the draft mission developed by the Board at the retreat: “We gather in community to nourish souls, transform lives, and do justice.”

The Trustees discussed the following:

The mission will need to be changed in the bylaws.

Will a special congregational meeting be held to change the mission?

Joe Sullivan recommended that the congregation vote on the mission at the December congregational meeting and that the mission be removed from the bylaws.

Brendan Sterne was thankful that the Board approved $15,000 to complete the policy governance work. There was a one-vote difference in the vote to approve these funds. To date, about $7,000 has been spent.

Discussion and Action Items – Other

Background on Board Liaisons and their Function under Policy Governance: Nell Newton explained that in the past, one of the first things the Board did was to have Trustees sign up to be liaisons for the various committees, usually more than one. Under policy-based governance, the executives oversee committees’ work. Board liaisons would triangulate this arrangement. It is assumed that committee chairs will go to the executive who oversees that area. Trustees can still talk to people, but Trustees need to ask if the committee chair has talked with the Interim Minister or the Executive Director, as appropriate.

The Executive Director advised that a formal announcement to committee chairs should be made at a future All-Council Meeting. An informal decision made by the Board two years ago will be rolled out in the fall.

The Trustees and staff discussed the following:

The formal announcement could be done in July – after the Board does the July 18th service.

The Board should wait until the fall to make the announcement because some committee chairs will need more one-on-one conversations to feel comfortable with this new arrangement.

As the Board is transitioning to policy governance, Trustees should ask committee chairs to go to the Executive Team and wait until later to make this policy official.

The policy is still confusing.

The Board should advise leadership to contact the Board about policy issues.

Board liaisons play a valuable role. Trustees have built-in expertise — based on their interests and familiarity with committees — that they can bring back to the Board to inform them when discussing a related issue in Board meetings.

The Board needs to look at the linkage role that Board liaisons play.

The Board liaison role should be reborn so it is congruent with the linkage strategy.

The Board risks continuing to involve itself in operational issues.

As the Board becomes more familiar with policy governance, adjustments will be made.

The Vice-President suggested that the Board add linkage to the July Board meeting agenda and develop a series of steps.

Visitor’s Forum Recommendation: Margaret Borden nd summarized her recommendations for the visitor’s forum (Appendix, page 25):

Congregation members should not bring problems to Board meetings since the Board cannot take action if the item is not on the agenda.

The ten minutes allotted to visitor’s forum should be divided by the number of visitors present.

Members must give action items to the Board Secretary by the first Tuesday of the month for possible inclusion on that month’s agenda.

Reassure members that if they have any questions, they can approach any Board member.

The Trustees and staff discussed the following:

Members should contact the Secretary for consideration of an item to be considered for the next Board meeting agenda. The Executive Committee, of which the Secretary is a member, will decide whether to include the item on the agenda.

One Trustee expressed concern that once the Board has true linkage opportunities, the visitor’s forum may not be needed. Linkage events will help a great deal. Otherwise the Board may have to correct a member in a public forum for bringing an action item that is not on the Board’s agenda.

It is important for people to have opportunities to give the Board a piece of their minds. They may want to see all Board members at the same time. People come for all kinds of reasons – to admonish, to thank, to announce, etc. There needs to be a place to bring these to the full Board.

Make sure the visitor’s forum is a line item on the linkage “to do” list.

A community forum offered three times a year could be offered as a forum for members and friends. There is some concern about training inappropriate behavior by members.

Be mindful of the covenant for the Board and Executive Team, which says that we support each other in the face of congregational misunderstandings and disagreements, address concerns directly with each other in a timely manner, and encourage other in the church to do the same.

Board meetings are a perfect time to educate people who come to do mudslinging – to teach about our covenant and redirect them to appropriate behavior. We need this interim step rather than suddenly changing to no visitor’s forum. Trustees must be willing to bring the visitor’s forum back into covenant.

Could add to the last paragraph, “…whether a specific item is a policy or program issue”

A two-minute maximum was suggested for each speaker since an item can lead to 15 minutes of discussion by the Board.

Ninety percent of this issue is setting up a linkage system. A two-minute limit is an unnecessary constraint. The final paragraph is unnecessary. Any Board member can talk to anyone at any time about anything.

Motion: Eric Hepburn – Table the visitor’s forum draft until the Board does the linkage discussion

Second: Chris Jimmerson

Discussion: None

Vote: All affirmative

There was a quick reminder for each Trustee to sign up as Board representative for the Sunday morning service for the next three months. Board representatives read the special notes at the end of the service, come early to greet, stay late to greet. From June through August, only one representative is needed each week. Starting in September, two Board representatives will be needed each week.

Update on Stewardship: The President spoke with Bill Edwards and Tyler ?? about developing a theme about the mission/vision.

The Trustees discussed the following:

We do not want the congregation to have double vision or blurred vision.

Brainstorming about the mission is fine as long as the focus stays on the mission.

Gift for Luther Elmore: Nell Newton noted that the Trustees had overlooked Luther Elmore’s contributions to the Board when he had to leave the Board before the end of his term as Treasurer. Nell would like to collect donations to buy a gift card to BookPeople. She asked that Trustees see her after the meeting if any would like to contribute to the purchase of Luther’s gift.

Finance Committee Report: The Treasurer was tasked to revise the Finance Committee’s job description to reflect recent Board decisions. Her proposed edits (Appendix, page 26) include:

Budget: Delete preparation of the annual budget from the Finance Committee’s list of responsibilities. One of the Executive Director’s responsibilities in his job description is the preparation of the annual budget. The Board assigned annual budget authority and responsibility to the Executive Team during the April 2010 Board meeting.

Rental policy: Delete references to Finance Committee authority and responsibility – The Board approved a proposal at the April 2010 Board meeting to delegate rental policy responsibility to the Executive Team.

The Trustees discussed the following:

Trustees confirmed that these changes reflected Board policy decisions made at the April 20th Board meeting.

The Executive Director goes to all Finance Committee meetings.

The Treasurer clarified that budget authority is delegated to the Executive Team rather than the Executive Director.

Motion: Brendan Sterne – Amend the Finance Committee Report recommendation to change budget authority delegation from the Executive Director to the Executive Team.

Second: Eric Hepburn

Discussion: None

Vote: All affirmative

Motion: Brendan Sterne – Adopt the Treasurer’s proposed description change of the Finance Committee as amended

Second: Eric Hepburn

Discussion: None

Vote: All affirmative

Treasurer Description: The Treasurer referred to her proposed edit of the Treasurer description in the Policies and Procedures Manual (Appendix, page : Delete the Treasurer’s responsibility of working with the Finance Committee to prepare the annual budget – to reflect the Board’s delegation in April of annual budget preparation to the Executive Team.

Motion: Chris Jimmerson – Amend the Treasurer Description to reflect the proposed description change of the Treasurer description.

Second: Eric Hepburn

Discussion: None

Vote: All affirmative

Report on Budget Updates Regarding New Minister’s Contract: The Treasurer referred to Budget Shortfall for Interim Minister #2’s cost in 2010 (Appendix, page 28). The “Difference” column represents the possible $6,632 shortfall for the Interim Minister during September to December 2010. We do not know yet what Interim Minister #2’s moving expenses or professional expenses will be but we can assume that ten percent of his salary will be for professional expenses, and ten percent of his salary will be for moving expenses. It appears that the church will be about $18,500 short for the budget year because of the Rev. Broc’s expenses. The Treasurer referred to the paragraph in Section 2 of the Interim Minister #2’s signed contract, where he can switch funds from moving to professional expenses.

The Trustees and staff discussed the following regarding the budget dilemma:

Professional expenses are capped, and moving expenses are capped. The flexibility concerns benefits only. So delete the “*” note on the handout that “the contract stipulates that Interim Minister #2 may spend money from one allowance to another. Therefore, if he does not spend the $8900 in moving expenses, he can use remaining portions for professional expenses, disability [insurance], etc.”

Interim Minister #2 should be able to shift funds both ways — from moving expenses to professional expenses and vice versa.

The Board has committed to spend funds it does not have. As a result, the Board will need to raise the funds. If Trustees talk directly to a handful of angels, this would distract from the October Stewardship Campaign.

The Financial Assets Management Policy (FAMP) says that the Board may allocate up to $10,000 for unanticipated expenses in the budget. he Board could keep these expenses outside of the budget since the restriction is on the operating fund. There are other potential funding sources such as the long-range fund.

When must the Board decide what to do? The Board will pay Interim Minister #2’s monthly salary. The maximum potential liability is about $24,400, but the Board needs to ask him how much he needs for moving expenses.

The budget is a plan. We have a signed contract to which the Board is bound. Trustees must deal with a financial policy restriction that is not realistic.

The Board unknowingly violated the FAMP with the offer to Interim Minister #2. How should the offer have been handled? Could the Board have gone to the congregation to vote on changing the budget mid-year? The best advice from the UUA and consultants was to offer this salary to ensure ministerial quality.

The Trustees and staff discussed several concerns about the FAMP:

The FAMP requires that only one month’s expenses remain in operating reserves, which does not follow the customary four to six months reserve of customary financial best practices. Logically speaking, the Memorial Savings Fund could be used, but the FAMP does not permit use of these funds until one year later. As a result, the FAMP ties the congregation’s hands to meet the needs of the church.

The FAMP has no provision for flood insurance.

The FAMP fails to do several things and is not best practices. Parts of the FAMP should be separate, and parts of the FAMP should be in the bylaws.

An additional financial concern was mentioned. The Settled Minister Search Committee has agreed on a $1,700 budget required for their work. The church has already funded $3,700 — $3,500 plus a $200 item. The Settled Minister’s need for funds is another example of how the FAMP prevents effective financial decision-making to address congregational needs.

A Trustee voiced a concern that the accidental FAMP violation occurred as the church neared the mid-point of interim ministerial tenure, which could negatively impact the search for a settled minister.

The FAMP provides for the Board to cut the budget, lay off staff, cut health insurance for all staff, and turn off electricity during the summer. The Board elected not to take these actions because they would be immoral.

Simply put, the FAMP does not trust the congregation to spend its own funds wisely.

The FAMP overrides policy, so the FAMP will override policy governance.

The Trustees discussed the way to proceed:

The wisest course for the future is to revise the FAMP.

The Board needs to develop a proposal on what the Executive Team’s financial management policy should be. In December 2009, a proposal to change the FAMP requirements from approval at two semi-annual meetings to approval at one semi-annual meeting did not come close to passing. People proposing it were unprepared to explain the positive impact on financial decision-making. Strong proponents of the current FAMP did not realize the limitations of the FAMP.

Strong resistance to revising the FAMP is rooted in distrust or mistrust. Serious consideration of this issue involves a paradigm/cultural shift.

The Board needs to announce to the congregation that it unknowingly violated the FAMP. Trustees must show that the Board was hamstrung in addressing the proposed compensation to contract with a quality Interim Minister #2 because of the limitations of the FAMP.

The Board must accomplish two things: 1) develop a strategy for the December meeting to change the FAMP; 2) overcome the current culture by presenting a vision of the most appropriate financial management policy – one that takes the best practices in the current FAMP and adds to them.

The Board will need to get funds from places other than the operating fund but is not deciding from where at this time.

Process – Meeting Evaluation Forms: The Trustees made the following observations about the first Board meeting led by the new Board officers:

The President did a great job in moving the meeting along and keeping everyone on track.

Thanks to Beverly Donoghue for serving as Secretary while Klondike Steadman is out of the country.

It would be helpful to bring a few extra copies of the comprehensive packet to Board meetings.

The Vice-President did a good job monitoring the time spent on most agenda items.

At the retreat, Trustees used one to five fingers, with five being the highest, to represent whether they felt like they were heard. Tonight all but two Trustees responded with five fingers, and those two responded with four fingers.

On the need to raise hands to be called on by the President to speak, the Board needs to create ways to allow for more give-an-take when needed on a particular topic. One way is for the President to ask a Trustee with experience/expertise on a particular topic to provide information that is relevant to the discussion and when finished speaking, return to recognizing the raised hands, one-by-one, of those waiting to speak.

Even if the discussion goes in a different direction when a Trustee has not had a chance to speak, when it is his/her turn to speak, the person can always say, “Let us go back to the issue of…that we were discussing…”

When several people tried to talk at the same time, the President did a good job of structuring input.

For the best way to evaluate interactions and conversations, Michael West described a method he used several years ago: scoring whether and how often an individual asked the most questions, gave information, provided clarification, sought information, suggested action, reinforced someone, disagreed, interrupted, etc. He reviewed his observations of individual contributions by Trustees and staff during the first half of the Board meeting and noted that there were lots of reinforcing comments.

The Vice-President had a question for the group. He served as timekeeper. He let the discussion go as long as the stated agenda time. Was this okay? Trustee comments included:

Let the conversation continue a little longer if the comments are productive and mostly on topic.

One Trustee expressed some frustration over spending a lot of time on small points. He also noted that the evaluation focus is all about process, and the Board is learning as it goes.

The Trustees made the following comments about the meeting evaluation:

Most Trustees said they were heard.

It might help if Trustees do not put their hands up until the current speaker has finished talking. One Trustee slightly holds up his pencil, in an unobtrusive way, to alert the President that he would like to speak eventually. The point is for Trustees to make sure they are actively listening.

Trustees were pleased that Michael West wrote down his observations about the process, not content, of the meeting. It would help to have a grid with names, where Board members could keep track of process observations like Michael had done.

Two Trustees encouraged other Trustees to ask them to stop talking if they were asking too many questions. Both said they would understand and would not be offended.

Trustees cannot always tell when someone is through speaking. Perhaps if each speaker could say when they have finished.

Eric Hepburn volunteered to be timekeeper for the July Board meeting.

Trustees had these closing comments:

Thanks to Brent Baldwin, Director of Music, for the choir’s wonderful performance of “Cloudburst”.

As the Board is phasing in roles, let Eric Hepburn know about supplies needed for the Board box and chalice.

Trustees were reminded of the follow-up role: calling Trustees who miss a Board meeting to bring them up to date on highlights of the meeting and what was discussed.

Nell Newton reminded Trustees that she was collecting donations for Luther Elmore’s gift.

Returning Trustees welcomed Susan Thomson and Eric Hepburn, who are both new Trustees to the Board.

Board-Executive Team Covenant Reading: The Trustees and staff read aloud the Covenant of Healthy Relations for the Board and Executive Team (Appendix, page 29).

With no further business, the President adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,

Beverly Donoghue

Assistant Secretary

July 2010 Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes

by Posted in Board Minutes

First Unitarian Universalist Church – Austin, TX

Minutes – Board of Trustees – July 20, 2010

In Attendance:

Trustees: Eric Stimmel, President, Chris Jimmerson, Vice-President, Nell Newton, Immediate Past President (Ex-Officio)), Margaret Borden, Eric Hepburn, Brendan Sterne, Susan Thompson, Michael West, Laura Wood

Executive Team: Sean Hale, Executive Director

Visitors Present: John Keohane

Call to Order

The President called the meeting to order at 6:40PM.

Adoption of Agenda

The Trustees present adopted the agenda

Motion: Brendan Sterne—adopt the agenda

Second Michael West

Discussion: None

Vote: All Affirmative

Reading and Lighting of the Chalice

Visitor’s Forum

John Keohane announced that his Committee is seeking additional members to the Denominational Affairs Committee.

Consent Agenda Items

The Trustees had read the consent agenda items prior to the meeting.

Motion: Chris Jimmerson—Adopt the agenda

Second: Brendan Sterne

Discussion: None

Vote : All Affirmative

Process Evaluation

Michael West speaks on Process Evaluation:

  • Presented a matrix for process evaluation of board meetings. He will mark verbal behaviors. Purpose to give each member feedback and to ensure a more productive meeting.

Settled Minister Search Committee, by Michael West

Board Liaison Committee Chairs: Sharon Moore, Michael Kerry

  • Financial needs mentioned.
  • Between now and October, we will need to have a compensation package; we also will need a contract.
  • A negotiating team will be needed by November. One board member, one non-board member will comprise the team.

Chris Jimmerson motioned, Brendan Sterne seconded to adopt Values-Mission-Ends statement.

  • Approved.

Recommendation to adopt governance philosophy:

  • Motion to adopt by Eric Hepburn, seconded by Susan Thomson.
  • Affirmed

Recommendation to adopt Policy Based Governance as the model the Church will pursue for Our Governance:

  • Motion to adopt by Eric Hepburn, seconded by Susan Thomson.
  • Affirmed

Report on request for consultant-coordinator.

  • Sean suggests Walter Pearson, District Consultant, to visit to discuss staff salaries.
  • Request for invitation to Walter Pearson from the board.
  • It was decided that we should try to wait for Ed Brock’s presence before Walter Pearson conducts any workshops.

Report from General Assembly.

  • Chris Jimmerson: Highlight was developing deeper relationships with other church members. We have a lot in common with other UUs.
  • Nell Newton: Empowered by so many UUs in one place. Most interesting workshop was on racism. “Bless Those Who Serve” a book for military, developed by UUs, had a special recognition ceremony.
  • Sean Hale: We confirmed a lot of things we’re doing right, a lot of strategies for the future. Paid volunteer coordinator is on staff for larger congregations.
  • Eric Stimmel: Attended Board Presidents’ meetings. Spoke with other congregations about best practices. We’re in relatively good shape. A membership coordinator on staff is highly recommended. Thank you to church for sending him to General Assembly.

Linkage Discussion / Governance Team – Susan Thompson

  • How much time is the Board willing to commit to?
  • Chris Jimmerson suggested the idea of “linkage launch”
  • Sean Hale cautioned against the use of jargon (i.e. “linkage”) as being alienating.
  • The use of surveys was also discussed.
  • No decisions made.

Discussion of Governance Made – Brendan Sterne

  • Not making a decision tonight.
  • Some ideal broad characteristics were outlined.
  • The consensus is that effective teamwork is more important to the growth of a congregation than a “rock star” minister.

Process Evaluation – Michael West

  • 211 “verbal observations”
  • First half of meeting – 51% verbal interactions were questions
  • Second half of meeting: fewer questions, building on ideas that other people had proposed.

Draft Covenant of Healthy Relations for the Board and the Executive Team was read aloud by the group.

With no further discussion, the meeting adjourned before going into executive session at 9:10 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Laura Wood

May 2010 Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes

by Posted in Board Minutes

First Unitarian Universalist Church of Austin, Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes

Tuesday, May 18, 2010 at 6:30 p.m.

First UU Church of Austin, 4700 Grover, Austin, TX  78756 in Room 13

In Attendance:

Trustees:  Nell Newton, President; Eric Stimmel, Vice-President; Kae McLaughlin, Treasurer; Chris Jimmerson, Secretary; Sheila Gladstone, Immediate Past President (Ex-Officio); Margaret Borden; Jeff Hutchens, Derek Howard; Aaron Osmer, Youth Trustee; Brendan Sterne; Michael West, Laura Wood.

Executive Team:  Janet Newman, Interim Minister (Ex-Officio); Sean Hale, Executive Director (Ex-Officio)

Visitors Present: Stephanie Canada, Eric Hepburn Klondike Steadman, Susan Thomson

Call to Order

The President called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m.

Adoption of Agenda

The Trustees present adopted the agenda after the President noted that she would skip Item VI.E. as related materials were not yet ready (Appendix A, page 2).

Motion: Eric Stimmel – Adopt the agenda.

Second: Aaron Osmer

Discussion: None

Vote: All affirmative

Reading and Lighting of the Chalice

The President lit the chalice, reminding those present that they were engaging in holy work for the church. The Interim Minister led the trustees as they read the board covenant (Appendix A, Cover Page) in unison.

Visitor’s Forum

Stephanie Canada reviewed potential policies for the library collection and noted the current collection list (both in Appendix B), adding that the list is also available online. She informed the trustees of a candle blessing to be held in support of the Amarillo Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, which has been under attack by conservative religious groups (see Appendix C).

The President thanked her for her wonderful work on the library. Ms. Canada noted that Paul Fishers and Andi Wyndham had done much of the work on the library.

The President welcomed future board members Eric Hepburn, Klondike Steadman and Susan Thomson.

Consent Agenda Items

The trustees had read the consent agenda items prior to the meeting.

Motion: Chris Jimmerson – adopt the consent agenda items.

Second: Brendan Sterne

Discussion: None.

Vote: All Affirmative

Discussion and Action Items

Retreat and Values/Mission/Ends Session: The Vice-President noted that details regarding the May 22 retreat would be discussed immediately after the meeting. The Secretary reminded the group that the values/mission/ends session was scheduled for June 12 from 9 am to 4 pm in Austin. The President announced that the service on July 18 would be dedicated to presenting the new values/mission/ends to the congregation.

Fellowship Committee Chair: The nominating committee had recommended Sally Scott to serve as Chair of the Fellowship Committee.

Motion: Michael West – Appoint Sally Scott as Chair of the Fellowship Committee

Second: Chris Jimmerson

Discussion: None

Vote: All Affirmative

Interim Minister Search Report: Michael West reported that the Interim Minister Search Task Force was still hard at work and that they had interviewed a wonderful group of candidates. The task force was checking a variety of reference resources for each candidate.

Motion: Chris Jimmerson – Express the board’s great appreciation to Michael West and the Interim Minister Task Force for their dedication and terrific work.

Second: Aaron Osmer

Discussion: None

Vote: All Affirmative

Check Signing Policy Revision: The Treasurer reviewed the suggested revisions to the check signing policy for the operating account, which would make the Executive Director the primary signatory (Appendix A, Page 34).

Motion: Chris Jimmerson – approve the revision as presented.

Second: Michael West

Discussion: None

Vote: Affirmative – 9, Negative – 0, Abstain – 1 (Aaron Osmer)

Governance Discussion – Covenant Between Board and Executive Team: The Secretary and Interim Minister presented the draft of the covenant that they had created based upon discussions at the prior meeting (Appendix A, page 36), with the Secretary noting that the Interim Minister had done the writing. The Minister noted that she had received input from the Executive Director. The Trustees discussed several ways to clarify the covenant and agreed to revise it so that it would read as follows:

Covenant of Healthy Relations for the Board and the Executive Team

With the mission and vision of the First UU Church of Austin uppermost in mind, we, the Board and the Executive Team, covenant with one another to:

  • Presume good faith in all our interactions
  • Publicly support one another’s decisions and leadership
  • Address concerns directly with each other in a timely manner and encourage others in the church to do the same
  • Speak with one voice
  • Communicate crucial issues with one another in a timely manner
  • Demonstrate patience and trust as we all learn new modes of governance.
  • Support each other in the face of congregational misunderstandings and disagreements
  • Conduct ourselves openly and respectfully in times of agreement and disagreement
  • Agree to be called back into covenant.

Motion: Brendan Sterne – Adopt the covenant as amended.

Second: Margaret Borden

Discussion: None

Vote: All Affirmative

The Trustees discussed several ways to ensure the covenant would be treated as a living document, including a suggestion for reading it together at the end of each meeting.

Governance Discussion – Philosophy of Governance: Brendan Sterne gave copies of the information from the Bridge to Our Future sessions that had been held in the church to the Trustees and that he had assembled. He noted that the task for Trustees leading up to the values/mission/ends session on June 12 was to deepen their understanding of the values, possibility statements and peak experience stories that the congregation members had expressed. He suggested that recalling the nuances of discussions Trustees had observed and thinking about whether the possibility statements might be classified as “within” (differences made in the internal personal and spiritual growth of individual congregants), “among” (differences made in the church community and between congregants) and/or “beyond” (differences benefiting the greater Austin community or even further afar).

He noted that the Governance Task Force had held a discussion with Joe Sullivan, consultant for the governance transition. In speaking with Joe, the team had agreed that while we are on track toward moving to Policy-Based Governance (PGB), we are still growing into the potential for it, deepening our understanding of it and strengthening our commitment and ability to explain it to all those who might be affected. The Alternative to PGB is really the status quo with trying to apply additional best practices. PGB is the only coherent theoretical medical combined with best practices.

He noted that we are still forming our philosophy of governance, which could be thought of as our governance principals. He gave some examples of such principals:

  • Governance that has integrity and it truthful
  • Governance that is strategic versus day to day focused
  • Governance that is proactive rather than reactive

The Trustees discussed how important monitoring would be under PGB so that the board does not lose track of its own accountability. Even with monitoring under PGB, things may get missed; however, this is less likely with PGB than the status quo because it calls for proactive monitoring such the Internal Audit Committee.

Eric Hepburn related a video involving research that indicates that our over use of incentives and punishment may eliminate some possibilities of undesired behavior but also has stopped truly creative behavior. The Trustees discussed that one principal of our governance is that we would like to free our people to reach their true potential. We want a system of accountability and authority that empowers people.

In relation to this discussion, The Vice-President noted that based upon board input, the Executive Committee had met with the Executive Director the past week to go over his performance review. This procedure will need to be codified as we move forward.

The Interim Minister noted that the final appraisal of the Interim Ministry was due in June and could be in form of a letter from the President. The President agreed to complete such a letter.

Celebration of Board Year and Review of Goals Set at the Beginning of the Year:

Andi Wyndham and Scott Butki had joined the group. Andi presented to Aaron Osmer, Youth Trustee, a card and gift to express appreciation for his work in the church and to wish him well as he prepares to enter college.

The Trustees expressed great appreciation to Derek Howard and Jeff Hutchens, whose terms were expiring at the end of the month. Derek and Jeff expressed their confidence in the new board and the great work that is going on. The Trustees also expressed their great appreciation to Sheila Gladstone, Immediate Past-President, for her steadfast leadership in the church. Sheila noted how well the Trustees had supported one another and her during difficult times. She also expressed confidence in the work that the board had begun in the past year and in the new board members.

The Trustees thanked Nell Newton and praised her leadership during the past year as Board President. Nell noted her appreciation for the support of Eric Stimmel who had served as Vice-President during the year and expressed her confidence in him as he assumes the role of President in the coming year.

Gifts were given and well wishes were bestowed.

The President reviewed the goals the board had set at its retreat prior to the board year (Appendix A, Page 37). The church had accomplished many of the goals or was in the process of working toward them. While a few had not been met, even for these, progress had been made and ways of more fully meeting them in the future were being planned.

With no further business, the President adjourned the meeting at 8:35

Respectfully Submitted,

Chris Jimmerson

Secretary

Appendix A

April 2010 Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes

by Posted in Board Minutes

First Unitarian Universalist Church of Austin, Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes

Tuesday, April 20, 2010 at 6:30 p.m.

First UU Church of Austin, 4700 Grover, Austin, TX  78756 in Room 13

 In Attendance:

Trustees:  Nell Newton, President; Eric Stimmel, Vice-President; Kae McLaughlin, Treasurer; Chris Jimmerson, Secretary; Sheila Gladstone, Immediate Past President (Ex-Officio); Margaret Borden; Jeff Hutchens, Derek Howard; Aaron Osmer, Youth Trustee; Brendan Sterne; Michael West.

Executive Team:  Janet Newman, Interim Minister (Ex-Officio); Sean Hale, Executive Director (Ex-Officio)

Staff Present: Brent Baldwin, Director of Music, Lara Douglass, Director of RE

Visitors Present: Sandra Ries, Chair of the Nominating Committee

Call to Order

The President called the meeting to order at 6:36 p.m.

Adoption of Agenda

The Trustees present adopted the agenda (Appendix A, page 1).

Motion: Margaret Borden – Adopt the agenda.

Second: Brendan Sterne

Discussion: None

Vote: All affirmative

Reading and Lighting of the Chalice

The trustees read the board covenant (Appendix A, Cover Page) in unison and the President lit the chalice.

Visitor’s Forum

No visitors were present at the meeting who wished to speak during the visitor’s forum.

Consent Agenda Items

The trustees had read the consent agenda items prior to the meeting.

Motion:  Brendan Sterne – adopt the consent agenda items.

Second: Michael West

Discussion: None.

Vote: All Affirmative

Discussion and Action Items

Nominations Committee: The Chair of the Nominating committee presented the Leadership Slate for the upcoming year (Appendix A, page 36). She noted that the Nominating Committee would be interviewing a candidate to chair the Fellowship Committee shortly.

Motion: Chris Jimmerson – Appoint the committee chairs and board-appointed nominating committee members as recommended by the Nominating Committee

Second: Derek Howard

Discussion: None

Vote: All Affirmative

The Trustees expressed appreciation to the Nominating Committee, specifically phrased as “you guys rock”. The Trustees also expressed their appreciation for the committee chairs and nominating committee members who had agreed to serve.

Governance Discussion – Speaking with One Voice: The Treasurer gave an overview of the policy-based governance (PGB) principle of the board speaking with one voice (or not at all). She summarized the major points from resources located at http://www.carvergovernance.com/pg-np.htm and http://policygovernancetalk.blogspot.com/ (scroll to “Rigorous Debate”). She highlighted that board members must speak up when discussing high-level, policy decisions and be willing to engage in debate. After such debate though, the board speaks as one voice under PBG.

She gave an example for board discussion wherein a church member expresses discontentment with personnel policy and wants something done about it.  The member particularly dislikes the paid holidays days, which they find excessive in number and some frivolous in nature.  They would like to see staff work on Martin Luther King Day, Memorial Day, and others, just as people do “in the real world” because this member certainly does not get those days off.

The Trustees suggested the following way to handle such a situation:

  • Invite them to a board meeting
  • Do not invite them to a board meeting and inform them that the board has voted to delegate Holiday Policy to the Executive within certain limitations. Ask if they have spoken with the Executive and if they have not, redirect to the Executive.
  • Would the Executive have a conflict, as Holiday Policy would affect them too?
  • Ask them to tell me more – find out if there are any mission/policy issues and if not move the conversation to mission/policy. People often just want to be heard. Redirect to Executive after hearing their concerns.

The Treasurer gave a second example in which a staff person approaches a board member because they believe the staff receive too few paid holidays and that Veteran’s Day, Columbus’s Birthday, and others should get added, just like government employees, bankers, and others. There was general consensus that the staff person would be redirected to the Executive.

As a final exercise, she raised the question of whether individual board members should vote in a congregational meeting on matters upon which the board as a whole has made a recommendation.

The Trustees discussed the following:

  • Board members may have more influence and a board member voting against would not be “speaking with one voice” and could raise questions within the congregation over whether the board had really settled the matter amongst ourselves before making a recommendation.
  • Should not a member in good standing be able to vote, even if it is a board member?
  • If the recommendation to the congregation will involve the staff having to carry out a policy, the board not speaking with one voice could undermine staff efforts.
  • Perhaps think of the board as one entity – as a servant of the church wherein Trustees may be giving up some autonomy they might normally have as a church member when they agree to serve on the board.
  • If the board has not reached the point on any particular issue where individual members feel comfortable speaking with one voice, even if they were in the minority on the issue when the board held its vote, it may be too soon for the board to speak.
  • The situation might be analogous to parenting wherein the parents must be providing the same message.

The President noted that this was for discussion purposes, as the church is not yet functioning under PGB. A Trustee asked for a “straw poll”, as even though the church is not fully under PGB a congregational meeting was scheduled soon. The President asked for a show of hands on whether Trustees would be comfortable with each of the following options as regards individual Trustees voting on board recommended items at congregations meetings (will total more than attending as Trustees could vote for any option with which they would be comfortable):

All Trustees would be asked to vote for the board recommendation: 2

All Trustees would be asked not vote on the issue at the meeting or abstain: 10

Trustees would vote their conscious as a church member: 2

The Trustees agreed that this had been an excellent discussion that warranted further consideration at future meetings.

Delegation of Financial Reporting and Budgeting to the Executive: The Treasurer gave a brief overview of proposed motions to delegate financial reporting and development of the annual budget (Appendix A, pages 25 and 26). The Trustees discussed the following:

  • Concerns regarding not being clear over how the process of developing the budget would work.
  • The process would be similar to prior years wherein the chair of the finance committee developed the spreadsheets and worked with the different areas of the church to update them and develop the budget. What would happen instead is that the Executive Director (ED) would develop the spreadsheets and manage the process with the finance committee assisting and serving as a sounding board.
  • The motions should say “Executive Team” rather than “Executive Director”, as we would be delegating the budget to the team.
  • The Executive Director’s job description already specifies this duty.
  • Concerns that 10 minutes on the agenda is not enough time to discuss this (time was subsequently added to the discussion).
  •  Concerns that, with two changes to the Executive Team over the next 14 months because we are in the interim period, whether the ministerial/values/mission weighing of resources would be strong enough. The finance committee performed this weighing last time.
  • The next finance committee chair may not be able to manage the process due to time constraints and in the prior process the board seemed to get too “down in the trenches” in the budgeting process.
  • The ED’s responsibility is to the mission and the ED would have to work with their Co-Executive in developing the budget and the budget pass muster with the board. The board has to philosophically and literally sign off on the budget.
  • We are already delegating to the finance committee to develop the budget. The only difference here is we are delegating to the Executive Team instead.
  • A Trustee suggested language to amend the draft motion on page 26 of Appendix A to make clear that budget development must further the mission of the church.

There had been little concern regarding delegating financial reporting and management to the ED, so the following motion was offered.

Motion: Michael West — The Board of Trustees of First UU Church of Austin hereby assigns responsibility and authority for church financial reports, related data, and otherwise supervising financial operations to the Executive Team.  Said authority and responsibility includes the ability to change and adjust the report format, the manner of keeping data, and any related policy or procedure outlined in the Policies and Procedures Manual, with the exception of the Financial Assets Management Policy and Bylaws, which require congregational approval to change.

The Executive Director will inform the board of any material changes through her/his regular monthly report.

The Executive Director’s July 2010 monthly report will provide a more thorough description of the changes undertaken since adoption of this policy, the results, and significant concerns which have arisen in the process.

Second: Chris Jimmerson

Discussion: There was no further discussion.

Vote: All affirmative.

Based upon the discussion of delegating the budget development process, the following motion was offered:

Motion: Chris Jimmerson — The Board of Trustees of First UU Church of Austin hereby assigns responsibility and authority to develop the annual budget for the board to the Executive Team.  Said authority and responsibility overrides any language to the contrary within the Policies and Procedures Manual, with the exception of the Financial Assets Management Policy and Bylaws, which require congregational approval to change.

Acting to further the mission of the church, the Executive Team will present a budget proposal to the board for consideration no later than its monthly October meeting.

Second: Eric Stimmel

Discussion: There was no further discussion

Vote: Affirmative – 7, Negative – 2, Abstain – 0

Delegation of Rental Policy to the Executive Team: The Vice-President presented a proposed motion to delegate facilities rentals to the Executive Team to the free the board of discussions over small adjustments to the policies and operational details (Appendix A, page 27).

Motion:  Jeff Hutchens – The Board of Trustees of First UU Church of Austin hereby assigns responsibility for and authority to change church rental policy to the Executive Team.  Said authority and responsibility overrides any language to the contrary within current policy, including the Policies and Procedures Manual, with the exception of the Financial Assets Management Policy and Bylaws, which require congregational approval to change.

The Executive Director will inform the board of any material changes to said policy through her/his regular monthly report.

The Executive Director’s July 2010 monthly report will provide a more thorough description of the changes undertaken since adoption of this policy, the results, and significant concerns which have arisen in the process.

Second: Brendan Sterne

Discussion: None

Vote:  All Affirmative

Covenant Between the Board of Trustees and the Executive Team:  As the board has begun delegating to the Executive Team, the Secretary and the Interim Minister facilitated a discussion of promises the board and the Executive Team might make with one another to ease this transition and support one another. Such promises that the board might make to the Executive Team and that the Executive Team might make to the board will serve as the basis of a covenant. As the discussion unfolded, it became clear that most of the promises were mutual. They included:

  • We will presume good faith.
  • The board will speak with one voice and the Executive Team will speak with one voice.
  • We will support one another’s decisions publicly.
  • We will address concerns directly with one another and encourage others in the church to do so also.
  • We will communicate crucial issues with one another in a timely manner.
  • The board promises to Executive Team that the we have “got your back” during this time of change in the church, and the Executive promises to trust that the board has “got your back”.
  • We will have patience with one another as we learn new modes of governance.

A Trustee suggested that the current board covenant might also serve as the board and Executive Team covenant, while others expressed a desire to see a specific covenant regarding the board/Executive Team relationship. The Interim Minister and Secretary agreed to take the data from the discussion and return with draft language for a Board of Trustees and Executive Team Covenant of Healthy Relations.

Settled Minister Search Committee: Trustee Michael West, who had been charged by the board to lead the selection process for the committee, presented the following church members to serve on the Settled Minister Search Committee (SMSC): Sharon Moore, Maria Nehring, Jill Wiggins, Lynda West, Jill Smith, John Franks, Dale Whiteaker-Lewis, Michael Kersey, Gary Bennett. The Trustees agreed that this was a great group to serve in this important role. A Trustee commented that it will be important that the SMSC operate with an open and transparent process while also guarding confidentiality.

Motion: Derek Howard — adopt the slate of members of the SMSC as recommended and charge them with the task of selecting the candidate for presentation to the Congregation for Senior Minister of First UU Austin.

Second: Chris Jimmerson

Discussion: A Trustee inquired as to the reasons the members had given for serving on the committee. Their reasons included:

  • A feeling this is an important decision in the life of the church
  • Wanting to make an important contribution
  • Feeling strongly about the importance of the ministry of the church
  • Feeling this importance affects all areas of the church, for example Stewardship.

Michael West also noted that the members will bring a variety of skills and experience, demographics and lengths of time as church members.

Vote: All Affirmative

The Interim Minister offered to conduct a ceremony of investiture for the SMSC, as well as the new Board of Trustees, once elected. The Trustees agreed that this would be terrific.

Report on Interim Minister Salary and Housing Package: The President reported that in order to attract the best candidates for Interim Minister and to prepare ourselves for doing the same for the Settled Minister Search, the Executive Committee had authorized the Interim Minister Search Task Force to enter midpoint into the UUA Settlement System. This totaled a package of $110,080. The Treasurer noted that moving expenses would be required also.

Request to Authorize the Executive Committee to Finalize the Agenda for the Congregational Meeting: The President requested this authorization for the Executive Committee, as there will not be another board meeting beforehand. She noted that the agenda would be much the same as the one for the Pre-Congregational Meeting (Appendix A, page 10)

Motion: Brendan Sterne — Authorize the Executive Committee to finalize the agenda for the Spring Congregational Meeting.

Second:  Margaret Borden

Discussion: None

Vote: All Affirmative.

The Secretary noted that the change to membership requirements in the bylaws that had been a requirement of a contribution of record within the last 13 months at the Pre-Congregational meeting would be changed to 12 months for the Congregational Meeting. This change was based upon discussions at the Pre-Congregational Meeting.

Special Fees: The Immediate Past President presented a proposed motion to allow the ED to set and assess certain fees on rentals when such rentals caused extra costs to be incurred by the church (see proposal and examples on page 28 of Appendix A). Such fees would only offset these increased expenses and would not result in excess revenue. This would prevent the need to go through budget revision procedures each time such excess costs are incurred.

The Trustees discussed that the Executive Team rather than only the ED will be allowed to make these decisions; however, the ED could be the person who complies monitoring reports for the board.

Motion:  Chris Jimmerson – The Board of Trustees of First UU Church of Austin hereby assigns authority to set and assess special rental fees, defraying the cost of doing business, to the Executive Team.  These pass-through fees will apply directly toward the actual cost of the expense, and may include, but are not limited to, items such as:

  • A sexton fee – which we already require for renter use of the Sanctuary and other special events
  • A watering fee – allowing us to rent the northwest parking lot.  Without such a fee, to defray the cost of watering the lawn to mitigate wear and tear, ongoing weekday rental of the parking lot during the summer would likely result in us having a mud pit when fall rains comes.

The Executive Director will inform the board of any material changes to said fees through her/his regular monthly report. 

The Executive Director’s July 2010 monthly report will provide a more thorough description of the changes undertaken since adoption of this policy, the results, and significant concerns which have arisen in the process.

Second: Derek Howard

Discussion: None

Vote: All Affirmative

Bridge Builders Action Team Charge: The Secretary presented a proposed change to the charge for the Bridge Builders Action Team. The Team is nearing completion of its current charge and has identified the need for a task force to oversee and monitor a governance transition plan. The Trustees discussed that it might be clearer to re-create this as a task force to avoid confusion over the many uses of the word “bridge” that have been employed in the church recently.

Motion:  Derek Howard – Create a governance task force charged with developing a plan for transitioning to policy-based governance.

Second:  Brendan Sterne

Discussion: None

Vote: All Affirmative

Governance Discussion – Report on Answers from Questions from Prior Board Meeting: The Secretary reported on a discussion he had with our consultant on governance regarding two questions that had come up at the prior meeting. The first had to do with whether a vote to adopt the Consent Agenda Items would still be needed. The Secretary reported that the board would still need to adopt these items. As regards a question over whether an issue involving a memorial fund would be a board policy or an executive policy after a transition to PGB, the secretary reported that the answer would depend upon how the board wrote policy regarding financial matters and where it stopped and delegated remaining interpretation to the executive.

Governance Discussion – Moral Ownership: Brendan Sterne facilitated a discussion of “moral ownership” or to whom the board is accountable. He summarized the highlights from information available at http://www.carvergovernance.com/pg-np.htm (scroll to section on board as owner-representative), explaining the difference between moral owners of an organization or church versus its customers. He also highlighted an article on church ownership contained on pages 30-32 in Appendix A. He noted that while for First UU Austin, church members are obviously part of the moral ownership, that the board’s accountability may include ownership beyond church members.

The Trustees discussed the following as their moral ownership:

  • Our mission
  • Congregation/Congregants
  • The future (e.g. future members)
  • Our ancestors
  • Austin, TX

Proposal to Shift to One Service During the Summer Months: The President presented a proposal from the Executive Team and Senior Staff that the church shift to one service during June, July and August. Such a shift offers several potential advantages:

  • Attendance is typically low during the summer so one service could result in that service having higher attendance.
  • It could save on some expenses.
  • It would allow for time and space for fellowship in Howson Hall after the service.

The Trustees discussed the potential advantages and disadvantages of the proposal, potential times for the one service and how to coordinate with the Public Forum without causing technical or other problems for the forum. The consensus of the Trustees was to pursue this potential change for the summer months, with the President and Executive Team working with the forum team and technical folks on logistics.

With no further business, the President adjourned the meeting at 9:25 pm. 

Respectfully Submitted,

Chris Jimmerson

Secretary

Appendix A — Supporting Materials

2011 Meeting Dates for Board, All-Council and Congregational Meetings

by Posted in Board Minutes

Meetings in bold are open to the public. Only church leadership (committee chairpersons) can attend italicized meetings. Only board trustees can attend other meetings.

January:

  • 9: All-Council Meeting at 1:30 pm
  • 18: Board Meeting at 6:30 pm

February:

  • 1: Executive Committee at 5:45 pm
  • 15: Board Meeting at 6:30 pm

March:

  • 1: Executive Committee at 5:45 pm
  • 15: Board Meeting at 6:30 pm

April:

  • 5: Executive Committee at 5:45 pm
  • 10: Pre-congregational Meeting at 1:30 pm followed by All-Council meeting
  • 19: Board Meeting at 6:30 pm

May:

  • 3: Executive Committee at 5:45 pm
  • 15: Congregational Meeting at 1:30 pm (NOTE: You must be a church member to vote at Congregational Meetings.)
  • 17: Board Meeting at 6:30 pm