Minutes of the Board of Trustees
First Unitarian Society of Madison, Wi
April 19, 2006
7:00
p.m.
Lower
Meeting House
Present:
Officers:
Alan Knox, President
Pat Anderson, President-Elect
Sue Radtke, Treasurer
Tom Detmer, Secretary
Jim Jaeger, Past President
Council Trustees:
Lorna Aaronson
Barb Avery
Chris Glueck
Kathy Luker
John Mathis
Ministers:
Michael Schuler, Parish Minister
Staff:
Diana Vezmar Bailey, Coordinator of Member Programs
Susan Koenig, Church Administrator
Observers:
Donna Hartshorne, Friends of the Meeting House
Visitors:
Robert Radford
CALL TO ORDER
After an
opening and chalice lighting by John Mathis, Alan Knox called the meeting to
order at time 7:00 p.m. and reviewed the agenda.
CONSENT ITEMS
- MOTION by Jim Jaeger and second by Kathy Luker to approve the minutes from March 22, 2006 (Exhibit 1)
- CARRIED
NOMINATIONS COMMITTEE REPORT
Bob Radford reported on the recommendations of the Nominations Committee (Exhibit 2). Much work went in to interviewing the candidates and so the report and recommendations are the result of hard work by the committee and the committee hopes the Board will accept the recommendations of the Board. Jim Jaeger stated that finding nominations for committee chairs is the work of the Councils and should not be the sole task of the Nominations Committee. This is the goal of leadership development. The format for presenting it to the parish will probably be different from how it has been presented to the Board.
MOTION to accept the nominations by Lorna Aaronson and seconded by Pat Anderson. CARRIED.
FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY
The study is now available on the Website to read and study. Barb asked how it would be characterized and what the reaction has been. Alan explained the discussions that have occurred and how some may feel that the “glass is half full” but most people now feel they know what we can do and “the glass is half full.” It is more positive than negative. It may not be a result that we can do everything we want but it allows us to connect up what we want with what we can afford to accomplish.
Chris asked about how many of the people who attended the last facilities forum were actually called. Alan said that about 60 people were interviewed for the feasibility study.
John is concerned about referring to $4.5 million compared to $10 million, which does not include the total original cost of $15 million. Does this lead people down the wrong road? The article referred to $10 million as the amount we can raise from pledges from the congregation. This was not intended to be the total cost. However, we need to be prepared to clarify this if there are questions.
Barb expressed a concern that the study said we need to work hard to reach $4-$4.5 million. If this is a stretch for us, then we need to be concerned about the achievability of the goal, or at least be concerned about how others reading the report will read it.
Alan referred to the plan for the forum (Exhibit 3). We must deal with the feeling that there will be naysayers who feel that the study proves we can not do what we want to do.
PARISH MEETING AGENDA
There are three items on the agenda for the May parish meeting:
1. Approve budget
2. Officers
3. Additional expenses for facilities, including building preservation
FINANCIAL REPORTS
Alan referred to the canvass report (Exhibit 4) and the monthly financial reports (Exhibits 5 and 6). Jim Jaeger reviewed the results on the statements and introduced Sue. Sue Radtke refrained from making a speech. We are being conservative in our estimates. Susan said that Brian Joiner has a model that he is developing for how to project these things. We still believe we can come in with a balanced budget for the coming year, which is quite an accomplishment given the amount of fixed costs we have, including personnel costs. Jim referred to Estimated Expenses (Exhibit 7). We have dramatically increased our outlay for social justice and for other activities that in years past were a much smaller portion of our budget. We should educate our congregation on this so that it is understood what we are accomplishing with our resources.
Susan reviewed the budget development process, including the timeline and the flow of the budget from one party to another. Right now it looks like we will have a budget gap of $125,000 between our revenues and our expenses, divided into roughly equal thirds. One third is based on a more realistic revenue figure (i.e. more conservative). Also there is revenue lost due to construction interruption, such as parking revenues. Finally there is phantom revenue, meaning overestimate of revenue based on unrealistic figures. Now we are going to have to make hard choices to balance the budget. This includes reducing the staff salary increases. We will take this up next week to discuss the budget on Wednesday, April 26, 2006.
GOVERNANCE
We are interconnected in how we have to use and consider governance in our Society at this time as we are considering how to structure and improve our governance. Exhibit 8.
BREAK 8:10-8:20
Alan has talked with the six Council Chairs to determine how each of them have viewed our governance structure and how it is working. They have different viewpoints. Also there is uncertainty reflected in various questions. Why is there a shortfall in our capital campaign goal? Why were we not able to get everything we want? How do we measure community building? We need a renewed commitment to leadership development. There are things we can do better. That is a goal we should have. We need to do something to get staff into better facilities for working. There is concern about the transition period.
Alan has sent out some materials for the Council Chairs to use in developing
position descriptions and what gets done. We want to make it more
visible what positions need to do. Exhibit 9.
Pat described what is intended at the leadership retreat. The idea
is to develop what we want to accomplish with the various job descriptions. The
teams at the retreat will work on this, similar to what Barb previously
drafted. It is not expected that a final product will definitely
come out of the retreat because of time constraints. But we hope
to be able to go a long way towards accomplishing that.
As far as facility development over the next several months is concerned,
we need to have a checklist or bullet points that will regularly inform
the Society about the progress of the facility. There are broad
decisions that the board needs to be involved in making. Other minor
items only require informing the board. Similarly this information
can be made available to the congregation at a touchpoint such as the Website.
What are the core goals? We need to focus on those and allow the
Coordinating Committee to do its job. The following core needs exist:
Office space
Meeting space
RE space
Music space
The Board agreed to ask the Coordinating Committee to draft its plan for proceeding and its rationale for making its overarching decisions for a revised facilities plan by the time of the leadership retreat on May 20th. This is intended to better inform the Board of how the Committee will proceed and on what principles it will proceed.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION
by to adjourn.
CARRIED
Meeting was adjourned at time 9:20 p.m.
Minutes by, Tom Detmer, First Unitarian Society Board Secretary
EXHIBITS
1. Minutes of March 22, 2006
2. Nominations Committee Report
3. Plan for the April 23, 2006 forum
4. Canvass Report
5. March Balance Sheet
6. March Operating Statement
7. Estimated Expenses Pie Chart for 2005-2006
8. Governance documents
9. Expectations of Council Trustees
