How my congregation voted for Morales and Hallman

At our annual congregational meeting, members looked over the two single page sheets the UUA provided in the last meeting, one for each presidential candidate.

Last month's newsletter article from me, which went out in April, but didn't get posted here until recently, and it had the web site addresses for the candidates, etcetera.

I told people I would announce who I was backing at the annual meeting, but I stressed they should check out the web sites and try to get a feel for the best president themselves, in advance of the annual meeting.

At our annual congregational meeting we had a secret ballot, it occurred early in the meeting, so we could announce the results before the end of the meeting. We had previously agreed that we would award votes proportionally. That is if 50% of the congregation voted for one candidate, then each would get 6 votes (we get 12 delegates at GA, due to our size-- 576 adult members).

I discovered just before the annual meeting that I, the outgoing board president, the music director, and an incoming board member (the only people who told me their picks) had all chosen the same candidate-- Peter Morales.

The congregation voted this way:

10 votes -- Rev. Peter Morales
2 votes -- Rev. Laurel Hallman

We will be mailing in our absentee ballots next week, well in advance of the June 17 deadline.

I am proud of my congregation. They did the research, arrived at their choice, and are making their voice heard, despite the fact that only 4 of us are attending GA in Salt Lake City, due to costs, etcetera.

Ballots & Absentee Voting Update from the UUA

Under the UUA bylaws, candidates for UUA President and Moderator must submit petitions to run for these offices. For the office of President, Rev. Laurel Hallman and Rev. Peter Morales submitted petitions and their petitions both met the bylaw requirements. And for the office of Moderator, Gini Courter submitted petitions that met the bylaw requirements. Therefore, the UUA election ballot will contain the names of Peter Morales and Laurel Hallman for President and Gini Courter for Moderator. For further information on the candidates, please visit these websites:

Peter Morales - http://www.moralesforuuapresident.org/
Laurel Hallman - http://www.hallmanforuuapresident.com/

Gini Courter -
http://www.uua.org/aboutus/governance/officers/moderator/courtergini/index.shtml


For all other offices (Financial Advisor, Trustee At Large, Youth Trustee At Large, General Assembly Planning Committee, Nominating Committee, Commission on Appraisal, Commission on Social Witness, and Board of Review), a slate of candidates is put forward by the Nominating Committee. Anyone wishing to run for one of these offices who was not nominated by the Nominating Committee can run by petition. However, no one submitted petitions to run for any of these offices. Therefore, the UUA election ballot will contain the names of the individuals put forward by the Nominating Committee: http://www.uua.org/documents/nc/09_slate.pdf

The UUA bylaws do not allow write-in voting, so voting will be limited to the candidates listed on the ballot.

Important Information about Absentee Voting

Under the UUA bylaws, congregations that have met the certification requirements for sending voting delegates to General Assembly can vote in the election in two ways:

By submitting completed absentee ballots. Absentee ballots with instructions and biographical information about the candidates will be mailed to congregations in early May and must be returned by June 17.

By sending delegates to vote on site at General Assembly on Saturday, June 27. All GA delegates who have voting credentials that were not used to vote absentee will be eligible to vote on site.

A congregation can use a mix of both of these methods if it wishes. For example, if a congregation will be sending some but not all of its delegates to General Assembly, the congregation can vote absentee for any of the delegate slots that won't be used to send delegates to General Assembly.

However, the system prevents double-voting, so if a congregation is eligible for three delegate slots and submits two completed absentee ballots, only one General Assembly delegate from that congregation will be allowed to vote on site.

When discerning how to vote in the election (absentee or on site), congregations have wide discretion in determining whether and how to instruct their delegates. For example, a congregation could hold a congregational meeting to discuss the election and then could direct its delegates to vote for particular candidates. Or the congregation could appoint delegates and allow those delegates to vote their consciences.

More detailed instructions for voting will be included with the ballot mailing in early May.

Please let me know if you have questions about the election. For more information on UUA Elections, see http://www.uua.org/aboutus/governance/elections/index.shtml

---Paul Rickter, UUA Secretary

Questions and Answers from the Presidential Candidates

Just in case you didn't already know...

Questions and Answers from the Presidential Candidates

The candidates for President of the Unitarian Universalist Association have agreed to respond to a series of questions which may be helpful to General Assembly delegates in assessing the candidates' qualifications.

Beginning in January 2009, the candidates will respond to one question per month, although both candidates agreed to respond to an initial question (November 2008) as a preview of this question-and-answer format.

Check back on a monthly basis for updates to this page.

January 2009: Five years from now, what goals will have been realized?

No question of the month in December 2008

November 2008: How will you keep the next generation of Unitarian Universalists engaged?

absentee ballot voting at GA 2009

How might we think about absentee ballot voting at GA 2009.

I would say that delegates are representatives of a local congregation. As such, they should vote the will of the congregation, not their own will; otherwise they are representing themselves as individuals, not as a messenger from the congregation. The difference here is between representative democracy and direct democracy.

I would suggest that a representative democracy is where delegates are granted authority to vote their conscience with the idea that they are somehow representative of the rest of the congregation. Remember delegates are always delegates OF a congregation. The problem with this idea when it comes to GA is that there are high bars (a poll tax, if you will) to participation in the democratic process. Almost by definition, delegates who have the $2,000, the five days vacation leave, and the desire and wherewithal are not representative of their congregations. They are an elite within the congregation. They are people interested enough and with the necessary resources to attend. Furthermore, if they don't poll their congregation ahead of time on the issues and on the candidates, how can they possibly represent their congregation? Instead, they represent themselves. And then we don't necessarily have a traditional representative democracy. Instead we have a platonic republican idea of philosopher kings (which is how the UUA board works). We send our learned sages (and smart youth) to GA to discuss matters of great import, make decisions, and then-- if they get around to it-- let us know how it all turned out. The congregation as a whole is not represented, there is little congregational input, and less linkage between the stakeholders and the decision makers. Many people question whether this system is as democratic as it could be.

It is possible to provide a more direct democracy by telling delegates they are charged as proxy representatives of the collective congregational will. They may end up voting not for their particular candidate, but for the candidate the congregation-- in proportion-- votes for. We will limit delegates ability to vote for candidates by letting delegates know they are to be proxy representatives for the congregational will. Why? Because we believe we are part of an association of congregations, not a collection of individuals, some of whom get to go to GA and some of whom do not.

We will name delegates, fill out the delegate cards, take the will of the congregation, let the delegates know what the proportional vote is, and hence how many delegates will be instructed to vote for one presidential candidate, and the rest will be instructed to vote for the other. And we would do that for any contested election we can send in an absentee ballot in for. Then, we will mail in all ballots absentee together in the same envelope, after ensuring the proportion is correct, whether or not any delegate actually attends GA.

This system will ensure it is the will of the congregation-- not the opinion of particular individuals-- who decide the votes. It also ensures we vote all of the absentee ballots we are entitled to. This system ensures any congregational member can have input simply by showing up to a meeting after church. It gets them more informed as to what is going on at the national level, it gets far more people informed about the candidates, and it insures the congregation as a whole (and not just a few elite) gets a chance to participate in the election process of GA.

My congregation also does this for district elections.

What do you think?

Absentee Voting at GA 2009

>>Recent discussions on this listserv have centered around the process for selecting delegates to attend GA. I have a slightly different question--how, when there is a contest, does your congregation apportion its share of votes for UUA president and moderator? Could you share your process?<<

The above was from a large church chat list. Here is my response...

In order to ensure as full participation as possible, particularly important will be getting the absentee ballot in, and especially from larger churches. For example, I will make sure we get those absentee ballots in, because although we get 11 delegates, I would be surprised if we got more than 1 or 2 people going to GA.

What I have worked out with our board, is that we will have a congregational meeting, and present material from both campaigns. I will make a brief speech on why I support a particular candidate, and why I think other people support the other one. Our folks will cast a paper ballot for Peter or Laurel for president (the other races appear to be uncontested at this point). Then the absentee ballots will all be filled out on a proportional basis.

We will mail them all in, in advance, for ALL our delegate votes.

This way, the vote will reflect the desire of the congregation as a body-- not as the votes of individual delegates. This has been a major flaw in the GA democratic process, in my view.

Single 8 year term for UUA President?

From the October UUA Board meeting:

The “Our Association Working Group” is considering proposing to the UUA Board,

...a single 8 year terms for UUA President and Moderator, which will require a bylaws change. The Board will take more time to consider the implications of such a change before proceeding.”

I don't know about you, but I prefer the 4 year terms.

Increased Costs for GA Registration, Child care, Exhibitor’s Fees

At the UUA Board meeting last month,

Lyn Conley of the board finance committee reported that the committee will propose two motions. One will be to increase registration, child care and certain exhibitors’ fees as recommended by the GA Planning Committee. The other will be to include the GA budget as a separate segment within the UUA budget beginning in FY 2010. Any surplus in the GA budget existing at that time will be carried forward into the segment.

Apparently, the board approved the cost increases. This is a move in the wrong direction, as far as child care costs go, and as far as the Central Midwest District is concerned.

There is already an economic barrier to GA participation for families with children, which is one reason why we see so few of them at GA, and so many gray heads and youth, instead.

If anything, the child care costs ought to be lowered and subsidized.

I urge you to consider contacting your UUA trustee directly about this.