Comments on: Who loses with regions?

By: Blog roundup: The price of democracy, no easy Easters, and more « uuworld.org : The Interdependent Web

Fri, 12 Mar 2010 01:25:34 +0000

[…] will stay on in the new order of things, but I find myself wanting more specifics laid out on what sorts of cuts will be made in the transition. Even as a district board member, I’m fine with those decisions being made above my pay […]

By: Boy in the Bands - The winners with regions

Boy in the Bands - The winners with regions — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 02:50:22 +0000

[…] asks who the losers would be. Staff, to be sure. That’s what reorganizations are for. But I wonder who the […]

By: chutney

chutney — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:29:21 +0000

I wonder if we could end up with a regional assembly held in three locations over a couple of months, with (mostly) identical programming. Might be good transition to a one-location, one-date regional assembly, though who knows how the costs would work out?

I’d also like to see some decentralization of functions, and the whole ordination/fellowshipping process is a great place to start.

By: ogre

ogre — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 03:29:50 +0000

I’d be interested in hearing what responsibilities are being devolved from the UUA to the regions with this. If it’s just that there will be superdistricts, and “Districts” will fade (and/or linger, in the same was that some state Universalist Conventions do…), then I’m not sure I see any real value.

I imagine that if the 5th Principle Project’s objective of moving G.A. to every other year passes, we’d see regional assemblies. Which would… sort of obviate much of the objective, as they’d still be quite expensive for most to attend. Or we’d see district assemblies continue–making regions more an administrative reality, but one disconnected from experienced UU life for most.

If it started to mean that the MFC’s functions were decentralized, I’d be delighted–the pseudo-presbytery system we’ve got wasn’t something that really ever got congregational approval, as far as I can see, and I’m unconvinced that it’s a good idea. Of course, I think that could be handled at a district level too–but anything that starts decentralization would be a good thing….

By: chutney

chutney — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 21:56:41 +0000

Another question: Assuming that at least some district admin staff will be laid off, what will be done with the money saved by this? Will it go back into the regions, so that they can hire more program staff, or will regions not see any of that money?