openuua.org

One of our UU principles is: “The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large.”

If we are going to promote democracy in society at large, we should model it in the UUA. Modern democracies require a well-informed electorate.

Here are some basic requirements of local, state, and federal governments, followed by how the UUA operates.

All meetings must be announced and open to the public

UUA board meetings are open; committee meetings are not. The UUA board has Friday afternoon sessions to discuss one subject in depth. These are often closed.

The public must be allowed to speak to any item on the agenda.

The public is not invited to speak at UUA board and committee meetings. There is no “open-mike” to allow people to make a two-minute statement.

Boards, commissions, and committees meet at a U-shaped table with public seats at the open end.

The UUA board meets around a rectangular table so the audience looks at people’s backs. It is hard to follow the discussion and there is a feeling of not being welcome.

The agenda must be available to the public at least 72 hours in advance of each meeting.

The agenda is sometimes posted on the web site and sometimes not.

The public must be given advance copies of all reports to be discussed at the meeting.

This is usually provided on a web site by clicking on the agenda item to go to the relevant report. The UUA rarely provides reports. The usual approach has been to inform the public only after the board has voted on an issue.

Draft minutes must be posted promptly.

The UUA believes their minutes cannot be public until they have been approved, although a designated trustee at each meeting does provide to the public a summary of each meeting. When these summaries mention an item (e.g., the disagreement between the MFC and the UUMA, the report on the selection of the president and the moderator) the report being discussed is not provided. Committees do not make their minutes available at all.

Votes must be recorded.

No information is provided on how board members vote. When it is time for elections, voters have received no input as to how their representatives have voted.

All appointments must be advertised and applicants considered.

The committee on committees and the nominating committee do solicit applications for people to serve on standing committees. But some of the most interesting tasks are performed by board committees and ad hoc committees, with no public appointment process at all.

Private email discussion is prohibited.

Although board meetings are supposed to be open, board members freely discuss issues on line. The discussion takes place on closed lists.

Before the ready availability of electronic communications many of these requirements would not have been financially feasible for the UUA. There is no longer any reason why they cannot be met.

Individual UUs have been pressing for a more open UUA for more than 15 years. Examples of reforms that have been made are:

• A rule change allowing candidates the opportunity to have the UUA distribute a campaign flier, which is mailed to delegates.

• A change in GA seating, so non-delegates are no longer excluded from the main floor of the assembly.

• Web postings of the board agenda and trustee meeting reports.

The board, while not rejecting the idea of being more open, has not given it priority and has failed to act on most of the issues.

The only way the UUA will model itself after our democratic governments is if the delegates make bylaw and rule changes that require it. Every election year delegates receive a packet of candidate statements because the rules now mandate that they be sent. If it were left to a practice instead of a rule, it would sometimes be done and sometimes not.

Arguments against being open

So what have been the arguments against making things more open? All these are statements made by trustees or staff.

“No one is interested.” This is a chicken-or-egg issue. When people are aware of issues, they are very much interested, as the lively discussion on UU email lists shows. Sometimes putting out there information on what is happening brings offers from people with skills that can help in the process. In any case, the information should be out there, and then people can decide whether or not they are interested.

“It is too expensive.” If keeping people informed is too expensive, it’s time for the UUA to reconsider its priorities. If it’s a question of staff time, more use can be made of volunteers. In fact, as our congregations know, the more people are involved the more they give. Whatever extra costs there are could be more than recovered by the increased involvement and recognition of being part of a larger group.

“Our meeting rooms cannot handle extra people.” Most meetings are held in hotels. Renting a larger room would be a very small expense. If more hospitable board meetings actually drew more than the handful of guests who now attend, the added participation of our members would make it worthwhile to rent space in a nearby hotel.

“People serving on boards and committees are volunteers, and should not be subject to onerous rules.” Most people who serve on municipal boards and commissions are volunteers, and there is usually no shortage of candidates at election or appointment time.

“Many discussions are not for public consumption.” Executive sessions are always permitted for discussions of personnel, negotiations, or litigation.

“No one else cares about this.” It should not matter how many people care if the issue is doing the right thing. But if you add your name to those below you can show the UUA board that people do care.

“There would be unnecessary controversy over unresolved issues.” If there is controversy, it is not unnecessary. It is better to learn about it before the vote is taken, rather than having to retract the vote later, as has happened.

Here is California’s rationale for an open government: “The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.”

If you would like the UUA to adopt the same principle, go to http://www.uua.org/mailman/listinfo/openuua and subscribe to the Open UUA mailing list. Participate in the discussion of the resolution to be presented to the 2004 General Assembly asking for rule and bylaw changes to make the UUA a more open organization.