Bill Bergerson, tonight’s moderator, opened the meeting.  Attending were Bill, Church of the Resurrection; Jerry Rees, Village Presbyterian Church; RoseTherese Huelsman, Guardian Angel Catholic Church; Rick Gasoway, Christ Lutheran Church; Curt Straub, Unity Church of Overland Park; Barbara Shepard, Shawnee Mission Unitarian Universalist Church; Terry Wiggins, All Souls Unitarian Universalist Church; Chuck Gillam, Village Presbyterian Church; Rita Norton, All Souls Unitarian Universalist Church; Beth Sperry, Penn Valley Friends Meeting; Karin McAdams, Penn Valley Friends Meeting; Mid Lawrence, Shawnee United Methodist Church; Osa Moody, Homewood Baptist Church; Barbara Chaplin, Leawood United Methodist Church.  [Members are not necessarily official representatives of their churches.] 

Introduction 

Bill introduced the meeting with suggestions for creating meaningful goals.  His devotions included quotes from Black Elk and from Sufi and Tao sources, suggesting that our group can be a repository and also a disseminator of light.   

Updates 

Jerry Rees gave an update on the rapidly-changing legislation concerning the Holcomb coal-fired plant in Kansas.  This week is critical, making it difficult for most of us to act through our faith communities.  Jerry asked Kansas residents to sign letters to their representatives, which he will carry to Topeka.  There is also an online petition available through GPACE (Great Plains Alliance for Clean Energy).   GPACE affiliation was discussed. It was moved, seconded and passed that we table the issue of GPACE affiliation until we have time to learn what affiliation involves and what “alliance” means in this case.   Jerry had spoken in Topeka as a representative of SSC, and members were not all comfortable with his having done so.  Bill noted that we don’t have clear guidelines for such situations and that we can vote rapidly by way of the Yahoo group website.   

Obstacles to Group Vision 

RoseTherese led a continuation of the vision discussion, this time focusing on the obstacles that we named at the last meeting.  We named and grouped the obstacles as follows:

1)     Geographic spread of church members

2)     Myopia: congregation in survival mode, focus on short-term convenience

3)     Stuck in a (theological) impasse/rut: dichotomies (separation) e.g. God and change, view of tradition which leads to inertia which leads to apathy

4)     Failure to connect: Perception that spirituality is unrelated to environmental issues, disconnect between concern for people and environmental issues, same old/same old mindset

5)     Timidity: fear of discomfort, fear of the new, ignorance of the problems, don’t rock the boat

6)     Control issues: church politics in conflict, minister’s perception of elitism, committees to go through, clergy resist what’s not their idea, fear that overt agenda hides covert agenda, nit-picking on strategies, greed of power brokers

7)     Diffusion/over-commitment: fear of the work involved, another committee! 

We agreed that while categories 5 and 6 might be the most difficult to change, we might well start with category 4, perhaps by helping people see that environmental change is linked to social justice.  We can work individually as well as together, perhaps even producing a program to which all our congregations would be invited.   

Organizational implications 

Yahoo website: Bill offered to contact those who are having trouble accessing the Yahoo website.  If we can all use it, it will provide a valuable repository that is always available. An agreed-on list of acronyms could make it quicker to use.   

Treasurer’s report: Barbara reported that in spite of all efforts, she still finds a $34.96 discrepancy in the books.  She recommends that we assume the current balance to be $366.71.  The $100 credit came from Village Church, when Dennis Murphy turned down an honorarium for speaking on environmental issues.     

Some suggestions for the future include deciding on two signatories for the account, encouraging members to pledge contributions on a regular basis, and creating common terminology for frequently used categories on the treasurer’s report. 

 Organizational leadership:  This month the agenda was set by a team of three.  Although there were suggestions for longer terms or for continuing with one agenda-setter, there was a generally positive response to this system.  One person would rotate off the team each month, and another would be added, thus spreading around the responsibility and the chance for leadership.  Since there are people on the committee who don’t attend because of the time devoted to organizational decisions, it seems critical to make a workable plan.   

The team for March will include Bill Bergerson and RoseTherese Huelsman; one more person is needed for the team, as does someone to take minutes.   Respectfully submitted, 

Karin McAdams