Dear UUCF Members and Friends on the Web,
The following is the unedited Ombudsman report submitted to the UUCF Board January 7, 1998. As the current UUCF newsletter indicates, this report is available from the UUCF church office upon request. This report was released to the interviewees on January 26, 1998. The only modifications were made to make it easier to transmit and read on the web. They are:
TO: The UUCF Board CC: Jim Nelson, Bill Welch, Skip Mertz (Retreat Facilitator), All Interviewees FROM: The Ombudsman Committee (Carole Crotty, Terry Finegan & Lana Kaminski) DATE: January 7, 1998
In our note to you on September 26th, we agreed to serve as an ad hoc committee "to gather information regarding concerns that had recently been brought to the Board's and the Congregation's attention, report our findings, and make recommendations that may help alleviate these concerns."
At that time, we envisioned that this would entail:
As events unfolded, however, we found that the interviews took longer to complete than we had anticipated, primarily due to scheduling. Also for the most part, the issues raised were not simple misunderstandings about policies and procedures that could be researched and explained. For this reason, we decided that it was impractical to attempt one-on-one responses, and hence did not write a preliminary report for the Board. Our plan to hold one or more town meetings was also rendered impractical, and in some ways redundant, by the number of congregational meetings held since we began.
This brings us to step #5. After much thought and deliberation, we respectfully submit the attached as our final report. The report tends to focus on concerns that may be perceived as negatives. It is very clear, however, that the interviewees have a strong attachment to UUCF, and have only its best interests at heart. We also believe that many, if not all, of these concerns can be addressed. And we request that the Board give serious consideration to all of the recommendations listed. We would be happy to meet with you to answer any questions, clarify misunderstandings, or explore further alternatives. And since our Senior Minister, Jim Nelson, is referenced in the report, we also would like to meet with him one-on-one.
We view our task as now complete. We would, however, appreciate a response to our report including any decisions that the Board makes re implementing the recommendations. We request that you also copy those interviewed so that they too may have closure.
Report of the UUCF Ombudsman Committee (Carole Crotty, Terry Finegan, and Lana Kaminski) January 7, 1998
We were charged by the Board of Trustees to gather further information on the member concerns brought to the attention of the Board and the Congregation in September, to report our findings, and to recommend actions that might help alleviate these concerns.
We began by offering to meet one-on-one with each of the twenty-one (21) signers of record of the September 2nd Open Letter to the Board of Trustees. Nineteen agreed and two (Dan Entingh and Meredith Entingh) declined. During this process, one additional member (Shirley Gordon), who met with the group during the summer, but whose name was inadvertently left off the letter, was identified and added to the list. We also added several individuals who were not officially part of the group, but who were suggested by members of the group, or who requested directly to be interviewed.
The full list of those interviewed (total 26) is as follows: Gus Babb, Sharon Babb, Michael Berger, Karen Block-Cacciapaglia, Ed Cacciapaglia, Steve Clapp, Rosalie Clavez, Tony Decamp, Shirley Gordon, Judy Gruner, Sharon Harrell, Marcia Helme, Alisa Joaquin, Gary Joaquin, Dick Kane, Caroll Karr, Mary Lazar, Dick Lucy, Pat McCormick, Anna Shullaw, Billye Stevens, Marsha Swett, Kendra Usack, Lola Usack, Jean Wilkins, and Ann Wood.
Although each of those interviewed had different stories to tell, it soon became apparent that there were several common themes, all of which are interrelated. What follows is our attempt to categorize and summarize them.
One theme is what one interviewee called "living our covenant." This covers civility in communication, showing appreciation for others' efforts, and most importantly, treating others with kindness and respect. Nearly all of those interviewed felt that we at UUCF -- Senior Minister, the Board, other church leaders, and the Congregation as a wholewere not adequately living our covenant. This theme was mentioned by virtually all interviewees, and many felt there had been a marked change in the last three to four years. Several observed that there now seems to be a mean spiritedness at UUCF.
Those interviewed cited numerous examples of how this problem is manifested. For example, lack of civility in communication has been evident in exchanges at town meetings (in one recent case, by a Board member), in e-mail messages that castigate others, in insensitive characterizations of others (e.g., the Worship Committee described as a "lackluster group"), and in personalizing issues.
Many felt there was not nearly enough appreciation shown for the efforts of UUCF volunteers. Individuals worked hard at volunteer jobs, and were rarely thanked. In some cases, they were even criticized for their efforts.
Perhaps most significantly, those interviewed felt that we had lost the kindness and gentleness with which we have treated others in the past---even those with whom we disagree. The point was often made that we can't expect to agree on all issues (after all, we are UUs), however, we need to respect each other's right to differing opinions. Interviewees felt that conflict and disagreement handled well can strengthen the Congregation. Unfortunately, many feel we have gotten ourselves into a situation where it is difficult to discuss things that are controversial. Some are afraid to express differing views for fear they will be openly criticized, so we all lose the benefit of their insights.
Many of the individuals interviewed mentioned concerns about the Senior Minister in this area. They pointed out that he sets the tone for the leadership and the Congregation, and that he has not paid enough attention to treating every member and friend respectfully and in a caring way. In town meetings and in personal communications, he has sometimes spoken hastily and without sufficient sensitivity to the feelings of others.
Some interviewees felt that the care and nurturing of others has been sacrificed for an emphasis on growth, prosperity, and programs. They pointed out that the feeling of good will needs to be restored before the church undertakes a building program. Otherwise, it will not succeed.
Another theme raised by those interviewed concerns issues of inclusiveness and the celebration of diversity. A number of individuals felt that UUCF should be inclusive-a place for everyone who wants to join. Several expressed concern about the new member process introduced a few years ago, which includes an interview with a minister. Some interpreted this as a screening process, since they did not recall any communication as to why it was changed. There is also concern that a message is being transmitted to the Congregation that those who are dissatisfied with the status quo should leave.
Many felt that UUCF has developed an expectation of conformity and an intolerance of diversity over the past few years that are inconsistent with our UU principles. They mentioned that of late certain groups have been discouraged, or at least not encouraged, by our leaders. The Singles Group, the Men's Council, and ACOA were cited as examples. Interviewees felt that diversity and accommodation of different views had previously been our strength.
A perceived lack of inclusiveness and acceptance of diversity on the Board and in other church leadership positions was also mentioned as a serious problem. There is a feeling that individuals are hand-picked for leadership positions based on their agreement with the views of the Senior Minister and the Board. Again, diversity should be desirable.
Another aspect of this theme concerns the unequal treatment of individuals at UUCF, in particular by the Senior Minister. There is concern that cliques have developed and that some individuals, especially those who are generous financial contributors, are treated with favor by being invited to dinners and other special events. The new format of the church auction was also mentioned as a manifestation of the different treatment of the "haves" and "have-nots" in our Congregation. Instead of serving as a combined social event/fund raiser available to all, the auction now is perceived as catering to big bidders with deep pockets.
One interviewee emphasized that there should be an "equality of congregants" regardless of giving level. Some interviewees felt this was particularly affecting many older members who are living on retirement incomes, and are unable to pledge at higher levels. Many of this group are feeling alienated. A related issue is the different treatment of members and friends, some of the latter of whom are extremely dedicated contributors to UUCF.
The exercise of democratic process in the Board's dealings with the Congregation was of paramount concern among all interviewees. This implies the "right to be heard" and the "right to be informed." The consideration of all input, feedback on input received, and notification of decisions reached-including how and why-and actions taken are all very important to them. Although this may be viewed as a roadblock to getting things done, it was felt by all to be necessary to ensure the smooth operation of the church.
As highlighted by the Stewardship Committee in its final report, an important function of any Board is advocacy of its constituents-which involves listening to them and responding. The report further suggests that for a membership organization such as ours this is extremely important, because our members support the church not through an investment in stock with an expected financial return, but in voluntary contributions of treasure and time, with an expected return of good will.
Many feel that effective advocacy can best be accomplished by increasing the size of the Board. They believe that a small Board, though efficient, cannot do the job. This isn't because Board members represent different special interests. It's just that there aren't enough of them to widely and effectively communicate policy and generate support.
There was a strong sense among those interviewed, that instead we have retreated to a top-down, CEO model of leadership, away from a more flat, member-driven orientation. While this may be an efficient way to carry out the business of the church, many felt that this was not in the best interest of the Congregation as a whole.
There were several examples cited to support this sense of top-down, autocratic leadership. Among these were the decision to hire an Assistant Minister, the manner in which a canvass vision is reached, the method of selecting Lay Ministers and Ministerial Associates (although the latter has a published application process), the decision to change the auction format, and the plan to rent to the Mindfulness Center. Interviewees believed that such issues, which have a deep and prolonged effect on the Congregation as a whole, should be presented to the Congregation for input and discussion as part of a democratic decision-making process-before the Board forms a position.
Concern was also raised over the bylaws process that took place last year. Many interviewees felt that the timing of the town meetings did not allow for enough input, and that it should have been made clear in advance that changes could be made during the bylaws vote.
Further, interviewees felt that in the several situations where the Board did seek congregational input, the results of that input have either not been shared or possibly ignored. Several questioned why the results of the recent newsletter or worship surveys had never been published. Some saw this lack of information sharing as a control mechanism by the Board and the Senior Minister.
In this vein, there was strong concern voiced over the manner in which the Board dealt with the Long Range Planning Task Force and the Stewardship Committee, and their reports. There is a sense that the Board totally disregarded the work done and the steps that were outlined in the plans.
And finally, interviewees expressed extreme unhappiness that the Board has declared that all member concerns need to be submitted in writing, rather than verbally as was historically the case. (Endnote #1) And more importantly, that the Board has not routinely responded to all member concerns submitted in writing.
Interviewees recalled that the need for more effective stewardship of UUCF resources was first identified during the long range planning process in '95. At that time, the charge of the Congregation was "to develop the means to broaden and wisely manage the church's financial and human resources to support the principles articulated by our Mission and Covenant statement."
The Stewardship Committee felt that at the heart of the message was a desire to nurture an ethic of true responsibility to one another and a real desire to participate in and carry out the vision of the Congregation. As noted in their final report, giving levels (both of treasure and time) are directly affected by members' perceptions of how their contributions are managed and appreciated. Members need to be assured that the money they invest (be it for operations, building or endowment) is wisely spent and accurately accounted. They also need to know that time volunteered in creating a loving community is appreciated.
These themes were raised over and over again by interviewees. Concerns were expressed about living beyond our means (Endnote #2), not saving for a rainy day (i.e., not adequately funding capital maintenance and capital reserve accounts), and not accurately forecasting and reporting expenses (Endnote #3). Some expressed outrage that the '96/97 Board reallocated budgeted funds, after congregational approval, to increase the Senior Minister's professional expenses (Endnote #4), and that we have not had annual financial audits as required by the bylaws. This perceived lack of Board stewardship of our financial resources is a major concern.
Concern was also expressed about the management of our meeting space. Interviewees reported that there has been a lot of high-level discussion recently about the need for more space, and hence a building program. Concurrent with this, however, and creating much confusion, there has been a discussion of (and a subsequent demand for a congregational vote on) renting Building 2 for a considerable portion of each week to an outside venture.
Many felt strong resistance to the rental due to a lack of hard information about our space usage and needs. Several interviewees even expressed resentment of the Montessori rental, and lack of availability of Building 3. They reported that not all groups using our facilities book space through the church office (Endnote 5). On the other hand, several groups reportedly meet at members' homes because there is no appropriate space at the church. Interviewees believed that for any building program to succeed, this information needs to be collected and disseminated-soon.
Interviewees felt that it is not enough to say that building was included in the Long Range Plan adopted by the Congregation in January '96, because the alternative of sponsoring satellite churches was also part of this plan. They felt that members need to be convinced that our current activities require more space than could be accommodated by eliminating or restricting outside rentals.
Also included under the topic of stewardship was concern for the nurturing of volunteers, and the effective use of volunteer resources and office staff. According to the Stewardship Committee report, a basic tenet of stewardship is to increase member participation in the life of the Congregation. This is now being addressed for new members by the Lay Ministry for Membership. Interviewees reported, however, that many long-time members are withdrawing from participation because they feel unappreciated and even criticized. (Many examples of such criticism were cited.)
Interviewees felt that church leaders do not receive adequate training in working with volunteers effectively. They frequently overstep their authority, leading one interviewee to refer to our Lay Ministers as "Cardinals-in-training." The result of all this is that more and more jobs are being deferred to office staff, which is stretching our professional resources and our budget-and reducing opportunities for small group community.
Several interviewees expressed deep hurt that they and their families had not been contacted or visited by anyone from the church during times of severe illness or parents' deaths. This was quite different from the experiences they had had when our former Senior Minister and Minister for Religious Education were in place. One interviewee mentioned that at that time, she even received follow-up visits after she left the hospital. This behavior has led several older members to fear that no one from the church will be there for them when the need arises.
There is a perception that our Senior Minister is very uncomfortable with visiting the sick, lonely, bereaved, and dying. Interviewees felt, however, that he has an obligation to see that this is done in some official way. Some went so far as to suggest that it was not enough to have this function handled totally by lay members of the Caring Committee. A lay member cannot substitute for a minister in this capacity.
A further manifestation of this discomfort is a perception by some that, like announcements, the Joys and Concerns section of our Sunday worship experience is tolerated, but not wholly embraced. One interviewee recalled a period several years ago when there was no Joys and Concerns section in the Sunday service for three to four weeks. Unfortunately for her, this coincided with her mother's death, and she had no way to share her grief or inform concerned members.
Interviewees agree that Joys and Concerns can be abused. We may hear things that are not truly personal experiences, but having this opportunity is necessary for a community of deep connection. It is not enough to have a book available to all in the commons area.
Also mentioned under this topic were concerns about the quality and availability of counseling provided by our Senior Minister. Several interviewees reported that they did not experience a feeling of empathy during counseling sessions. One felt he was dismissed rather cavalierly. Others noted that based on observed behaviors they did not feel that they could go to our Senior Minister for counseling. Still others reported difficulty in obtaining appointments. One asked our Senior Minister whether counseling was available during the summer, and was dismissed with a brief "no," rather than a referral. In contrast, several of these same members reported having excellent counseling sessions with some of our summer ministers.
While they recognized that a basic right of all UU ministers is freedom of the pulpit, interviewees expressed a strong desire for more diversity in our Sunday worship services -both in format and in orientation. Many, some of whom regard themselves as humanists or Mystics (6), were particularly upset with what they perceive as a definite leaning of late toward a more traditional Judeo-Christian message.
Several interviewees found certain aspects of the standard Sunday format irritating. Most often mentioned were the second hymn, particularly by the eleven o'clock crowd as the Chorale has left by then, and the frequent request during the Benediction to "turn to your neighbor and say... " But these were minor irritations compared with the lack of diversity in general.
Several interviewees stated that they now only attend lay-led worship and summer services, so of greater concern to them was any threat to curtailing this. Countering the observation that attendance is generally lower at lay-led services, interviewees noted that most, if not all, lay-led services are relegated to undesirable Sundays, such as Thanksgiving weekend, the weekend between Christmas and New Years, and the weekends of spring and fall retreats. Still there are concerns that, with a new Assistant Minister and possibly an Intern (rumor only) sharing the pulpit, even these might be cut back.
Another rumor that is causing concern is that the Board is considering doing away with the Summer Minister program, and instead having our new Assistant Minister take the pulpit. Interviewees feared that this would eliminate all possibility of having a women's voice in the pulpit. With two male ministers, many felt women's issues and spiritually are being overlooked.
Other interviewees expressed nostalgia for the sermon discussions held after the second service by our former Senior Minister and continued by our Interim Minister. They would like an opportunity to share and discuss their interpretations of the sermons with the minister(s).
Interviewees were unanimous in their desire to have our current Senior Minister focus more on being a spiritual leader than a CEO.
After our experiences with our past Senior Minister, and with our Interim Minister, those interviewed agreed it is understandable that the Search Committee received firm directives from the Board and other church leaders to find someone who would provide more management oversight of our resources, especially of our professional staff and finances-someone who would be more involved in canvassing and fundraising. This was also in keeping with the Lyle Schaller model for a "corporate church," which our Congregation meets in size and budget.
The result is that although we succeeded in those areas, many long-time members are now in deep mourning for a more pastoral ministry. They claim the human aspect is missing. One interviewee mentioned that her former congregation was also faced with this "CEO-corporate church" model debate, which is sweeping our denomination, but decided not to go this way for the reason cited above.
In this vein, interviewees also felt it is inappropriate for the Board to call on our Senior Minister to tell members to curtail announcements, for example. Our ministers should be perceived as voices of encouragement, not implementers of Board administrative policies.
Further, interviewees felt the Senior Minister should serve the Congregation, not lead it-that he should be more of a facilitator, helping us to realize our dreams, not striving to fulfill his. They felt that he sometimes seems to be more concerned with his time and projects, than in listening to others. One interviewee reported that she had set up three different appointments to meet with him, only to have them all canceled-twice after she showed up. Afterwards, she never even received a call. Other examples of this apparent disregard were also cited.
As mentioned under the section entitled Living Our Covenant, interviewees felt that the behavior of our Senior Minister in his dealings with our members and friends sets the tone for all the human interactions in our Congregation. They believe it is imperative that he develop a more balanced way of relating to all, and request that a formal Ministerial Relations Committee be established to facilitate this.
| (1) | The new Monthly Exchange forum initiated by the Lay Ministers for Fellowship may alleviate this concern. |
| (2) | A review of our annual reports supports this claim. Reported losses for '92/93 and '93/94 were $14.4K and $33.4K respectively. Further, the '95/96 budget was revised by the Board, after congregational approval, to operate at a loss of $25K. And mortgage expenses were underestimated by $20K in the '96/97 budget that the Congregation was asked to approve. See also (3) below. |
| (3) | Actual expenses for '94/95 and '95/96 were not reported in our annual reports, nor were forecasts after '94/95. This was required by the then current bylaws. |
| (4) | The then current bylaws stated that the Board had a duty to "establish the compensation of all employees of the Church, except Ministers [and] recommend to the membership the salary and allowances of the Ministers." |
| (5) | For example, a review of past church calendars and old newsletters will reveal that the Finance Council met for years without official bookings. |
| (6) | At the time of the congregational survey conducted in '92, these were the two largest groups. |
Those interviewed made numerous recommendations to address their concerns. We, the members so the UUCF Ombudsman Committee, endorse the following recommendations-each of which was suggested by one or more interviewees.
1. Church leaders, particularly the Board and the Senior Minister, should publicly encourage-and demonstrate-civility and respect for others.
2. The Board and the Senior Minister should facilitate resolution of differences of opinion rather than becoming parties to conflicts (e.g., in town meetings). In particular, they should listen to dissenting views respectfully, and take others' opinions into consideration rather than abruptly countering them.
3. The Senior Minister should be sensitive in his dealings with members and friends that he sets the tone for the whole Congregation.
4. The Board (or the Lay Ministers for Membership) should outline the new member process in a newsletter article, and explain (again) why it was changed a few years ago.
5. Church leaders, particularly the Board and the Senior Minister, should be sensitive in their communications that this Congregation is the spiritual home for many people with different views and interests.
6. The Board and the Nominating Committee should make special efforts to recruit individuals from all quarters of the Congregation for leadership positions. In this way, our leaders will be better able to relate to a much broader segment of the Congregation.
7. The Board and the Canvass Committee should consider doing away with Giving Circles, since these contribute to the perception that members who are giving at different levels receive different treatment.
8. The Board and the Senior Minister should be particularly sensitive to congregational reaction regarding holding events that are limited to selected members (especially based on giving levels).
9. The Board should have a regular column in the newsletter on par with "GAMS" and "from Bill... " to address issues before the Board or Congregation.
10. The Board should set up a schedule of regular open meetings to provide opportunities for information sharing between itself and the Congregation.
11. The Board should consider recommending changes to the bylaws to increase its membership so that it may provide more effective advocacy to its constituents.
12. The Board should consider recommending changes to the bylaws to have all significant leadership positions elected by congregational vote, possibly with contested slates.
13. The Board should present all major issues affecting the long term functioning of the church to the Congregation in open meetings, before making a decision.
14. The Board should set aside a time at each meeting to address member concerns, be they submitted verbally or in writing. All concerns brought to the Board's attention should be acknowledged. Responses should be received within 30 days. Written concerns should receive written responses.
15. The Board should monitor the effectiveness of the Lay Ministers for Fellowship's Monthly Exchange in providing a forum for member concerns. If this is deemed not effective, the Board should consider establishing a permanent leadership-independent Ombudsman Committee.
16. The Board should endeavor to strengthen the Finance Council, which has been dwindling in membership, and provide adequate financial oversight. In particular, the Board should ensure that all financial obligations mentioned by the bylaws are adhered to, and that reports are presented to the Congregation, with appropriate annotations, as specified.
17. The Board should establish a program for funding capital maintenance and capital reserve accounts as dictated by the Long Range Plan, and communicate this program to the Congregation.
18. Church leaders, particularly the Senior Minister and the Board, should pay special attention to thanking and honoring volunteers and others who contribute (e.g., sermon contest participants). For example, the Board and Lay Ministers could set apart time at each of their meetings to write thank you notes to volunteers. (This was done by previous Boards.)
19. The Board should establish a leadership training program for current and prospective leaders, including committee chairpersons. The training should include topics such as facilitating meetings, small group process, decision making, the care and feeding of volunteers, etc.
20. The Board should develop a process by which it, the Ministers, Lay Ministers for Fellowship, and the Caring Committee can be informed in a timely manner of serious illnesses and deaths.
21. The Board should charge the Senior Minister with establishing a program for conducting pastoral visits, both by the ministers and the Caring Committee.
22. The Senior Minister and Lay-led Worship Committee should include a Joys and Concerns section in each Sunday service, and show support for this.
23. The Senior and Assistant Ministers should establish a procedure with the church office for scheduling counseling sessions and meetings with congregants, and communicate this to the Congregation.
24. The Senior Minister should consider providing more diversity in Sunday worship services-both in format and orientation.
25. The Board should ensure that the number and timing of lay-led services does not deteriorate, and preferably improves.
26. The Board should continue the Summer Minister program, and if possible, attempt to have a woman fill the slot from time to time.
27. The Senior Minister should consider holding sermon discussions on Sundays after the second sermon. (This could be in lieu of or in addition to the lay effort recently initiated.)
28. The Board should consider creating a Administrator's position with broader responsibilities, so that the Senior Minister can focus more on worship, and pastoral care and counseling.
29. The Board should enforce its own administrative policies, not call on the Senior Minister to do so (e.g., asking individuals to curtail announcements).
30. The Board should establish a formal Ministerial Relations Committee for the Senior Minister.
As mentioned earlier, this report is based on interviews with the above-noted members and friends of UUCF. No systematic attempt was made to determine how the rest of the Congregation feels about these issues or how widespread the views of those interviewed are. It is clear, however, that a substantial number of individuals believe strongly that these are problems that need to be taken seriously and addressed. The members of this committee agree with that view.