Please adhere to these deadlines:

• Make requests for scholarships to Northern Yearly Meeting or Friends General Conference by priority deadline of May 1, or final deadline May 10, 2008. Those meeting the May 3 deadline will have priority. (Note: early FGC registration begins on-line on March 27-April 6, then opens up again April 11. Check registration materials for more on requesting scholarships or work grants from FGC.) Please note that TCFM funds are limited.
• All other requests need to be submitted at least six weeks prior to the event or Friends activity for which support is requested.

To request a scholarship, please download and complete the form linked below and send to Scholarship Committee, c/o Clerk, TCFM Meetinghouse, 1725 Grand Av. St. Paul, MN 55105.

• 2009 TCFM Scholarships Form

Jubilation — Paid Staff

At the January 8, 2006 Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business (MWB), TCFM Friends participated in a worship sharing regarding utilizing paid staff at TCFM. The following was minuted:

Jubilation followup:

The Clerk summarized the discussions the Meeting held at its last meeting for business, and previously, with regard to the various concerns identified in the Jubilation committee’s work durng 2005.

Terry irish reported on how Minneapolis Friends Meeting uses its part-time administrative assistant to support the meeting, including the types of duties performed, hours worked and wages paid. The clerk then invited Friends into worship sharing to consider the skills, gifts, and responsibilities that would be important if the Meeting proceeds to employ a person in an administrative capacity. Afterwards, the Clerk asked for suggestions for how to proceed.

After discussion, it was clear that Friends have energy to continue discussing the question of paid staff, but also recognize that the concerns that gave rise to the idea of paid staff are complex and interrelated. Focusing discussion on the idea of paid staff is, therefore, to narrow. We also need to discuss the underlyng question, which is how this Meeting can best carry out its ministries. This may include discussion of, among other things, the overall size of our meeting and the special challenges and opportunities posed by having so many families with young children.

Friends agreed that the committee clerks will discuss this concern at their meeting on 29th First Month and will bring further input to the business meeting. Friends are encouraged, as individuals and as small groups, to continue to discuss, gather information, pray, and otherwise actively play a role in helping the meeting decide how to go forward.

At the February 12, 2006 MWB, minutes from the Committee Clerks meeting were included in the Consent Agenda. This included a discussion from committee clerks regarding potential benefit/effect of paid staff at TCFM.

JUBILATION: Out of the recommendation of Friends at January MWB, committees were asked to consider how size of TCFM and the possibility of paid staff might affect the work of their committee. Committee Clerks participated in a worship sharing on the following queries:

What helps us to be faithful to God’s call and carry out God’s work?

How might paid staff be helpful (or not) in helping your committee to carry on God’s work?

Does size of TCFM as a community impact the work of your committee? Is there an optimal size?

Paid Staff:

• Community Service: can help with sign up lists and coordination of Loaves and Fishes and Project Home.
• News Committee: maybe copies from Kinko’s, concern that production of the newsletter falls mostly into one volunteer’s hands — paid staff could help with this.
• Stewardship: paid staff can help with coordination of volunteer efforts, so that we know what others are doing.
• Adult Ed: not much need for paid staff
• Advancement: paid staff could be very helpful with written and phone communication/outreach/coordination.
• M&C: paid staff could help with organization to free up M&C’s time for nurturing, etc.
• Gardens and Grounds: help organize volunteers, and (for example) individuals for snow shoveling.
• Fellowship: not much need for paid staff
• Meetinghouse: has difficulty attracting younger members. There is a need to pass on institutional knowledge (Meetinghouse upkeep, etc. etc. — huge amount of work). Paid staff could help with coordination, record keeping, and perhaps the actual upkeep.
• Development: Fewer Friends volunteering have the administrative skills to do the finances/administration. We need to acknowledge and get paid staff to help.

(Diane Peterson from PSAC was unable to attend this meeting, but e-mailed her opinion that since we are a big congregation, paid staff would help assure that the work gets done. Steve Marchese from Nominating Committee also could not be here today. In a phone chat with Marianne, he echoes sentiments noted above, particularly mentioning building report keeping, book keeping, building management, and coordinating volunteer efforts like Loaves and Fishes and Project Home.)

Size of Meeting: Overall Friends noted that there were more advantages than disadvantages to having a large Meeting. Committee work is enhanced by having more Friends to draw from. First Day School is richer for having more people resources and organization. Listening to God is more important than size of Meeting. One disadvantage is that newcomers sometimes get lost in our large Meeting. Helping newcomers get settled in small worship circles and committee work helps them get grounded.

Jubilation next step: Marianne will publish these minutes in the Consent Agenda for February MWB. Committee clerks (and TCFM Friends in general) are asked to submit to Marianne concrete tasks they would like to see a paid staff do. These will be compiled and act as the focus of further discernment at March MWB.

At the April 9, 2006 MWB, a written Clerk’s report was presented as background for worship sharing regarding paid staff at TCFM.

CLERK’S REPORT

This report summarizes TCFM’s process thus far with respect to the recent Jubilation questions of whether or not to hire paid staff, as it interfaces with the notion of bud Meetings and what size our Meeting should be. We come back to the last query considered in our 2005 year of discernment — “What are the best structures to support our ministries at TCFM?”

At December 11, 2005, MWB, we minuted: “MWB approves budgeting $8000 in the budget for paid staff, but does not authorize spending that money until we decide whether to actually hire paid staff.”

Then, at January 8, 2006, MWB: Friends participated in worship sharing on the idea of hiring paid staff at TCFM, simply as a way to begin to address the Jubilation issues one by one, in manageable steps. We minuted, “After discussion, it was clear that Friends have energy to continue discussing the question of paid staff, but also recognize that the concerns that gave rise to the idea of paid staff are complex and interrelated. Focusing discussion on the idea of paid staff is, therefore, too narrow. We also need to discuss the underlying question, which is how this Meeting can best carry out its ministries. This may include discussion of, among other things, the overall size of our meeting and the special challenges and opportunities posed by having so many families with young children.”

“Friends agreed that the committee clerks will discuss this concern at their meeting on 29th First Month and will bring further input to the business meeting. Friends are encouraged, as individuals and as small groups, to continue to discuss, gather information, pray, and otherwise actively play a role in helping the Meeting decide how to go forward.”

At the Committee Clerks meeting, 1/29/06, Committee clerks discussed both paid staff and size of meeting, as requested by MWB. An initial “job duties” list for a potential paid staff was developed. Regarding size of meeting, overall Friends noted that there are more advantages than disadvantages to having a large Meeting. Committee work is enhanced by having more Friends to draw from. First Day School is richer for having more people resources and organization. Listening to God is more important than size of Meeting. One disadvantage is that newcomers sometimes get lost in our large Meeting. Helping newcomers get settled in small worship circles and committee work helps them get grounded.”

So Friends who attended that particular Committee Clerks Meeting, chose to focus on paid staff — since it seemed, at that time, to be a question of EITHER we remain a large Meeting and consider paid staff, OR we consider bud meetings, likely with less need for paid staff.

The minutes from the 1/29/05 Committee Clerks meeting were published in the Consent Agenda for February MWB. Committee clerks (and TCFM Friends in general) were asked to submit to the TCFM clerk concrete tasks they would like to see a paid staff do. This were to be compiled and act as the focus of further discernment at MWB. As a visual to describe the sense of the Committee Clerks at the 1/29/06 meeting, Richard Fuller described our Meeting as an amoeba at January MWB. “As an amoeba begins to move in a new direction, it may send out a couple areas of early stretched skin and start flowing into both, and it is not capable of moving in both of directions at once. Then, as its sense of direction develops, a choice is made of one pseudopod and the fluid is pulled back out of the other and its stretched skin is re-gathered.”

“I think TCFM will want to proceed in a similar fashion, further exploring the idea of part time help, while not making a final commitment to it at this point, but also extending ourselves in other directions which may turn out to be mutually incompatible in the end, such as setting off one or more bud meetings. I think it is only by putting ourselves into tentative motion that some people will say, ‘Oh my God! This will never do!’ or ‘Oh yes! We should have done this years ago!’ I think it is only by putting the community into motion in tentative directions that we can get the feedback we need to discern which way we really ought to go.”

(Clerk’s comment: I think that at the 1/29/06 Committee Clerks meeting, there was a sense of a little more fluid in the paid staff pseudopod, and thus the desire to focus on this a bit, or the amoeba wouldn’t move. It is critical to be mindful of the other pseudopods, like the bud meeting one, but it seemed like too much to take on in one bite.)

At the March 23, 2006 Committee Clerks meeting, we worked to develop a list of responsibilities for a paid staff person. It should be noted that the makeup of clerks at this meeting was not the same as at the 1/29 meeting. Concern arose as to how ready we were to consider a paid staff person. Would describing a job description lead to a “slippery slope” that presumes that this is what TCFM wants. However, as a springboard for discussion at MWB, we did suggest possibilities of job duties for paid staff person(s) at TCFM. It seemed that two arenas of job responsibilities emerged, which may or may not be performed by one individual.

The first arena revolved around upkeep of the Meetinghouse. John Martinson and the Meetinghouse Committee have worked on an updated Meetinghouse Maintenance Manual which describes in detail the needs for upkeep of our beloved Meetinghouse. Along with this was developed a job description for a “Maintenance Staff Person”. This would likely overlap with the “handyperson” duties which have already been budgeted. Friends expressed gratitude to John and the Meetinghouse Committee for their work.

Responsibilities of a “Maintenance Staff Person”:

• to review the TCFM Maintenance Manual and become familiar with the layout and systems within Twin Cites Friends Meetinghouse
• To do weekly, monthly, yearly checks of building and systems and correct as needed. (Coordinate with Friend in Residence to identify which tasks belong to which position.)
• To contact professionals for annual check-ups and be there when they are scheduled so as to supervise and become more knowledgeable about the operation of TCFM mechanical systems.
• To be on call for emergency needs and arrange professional help as needed.
• To be on call for minor repairs, leaks, etc. and respond in a timely manner.
• To update the TCFM Maintenance Manual as needed.
• To work cooperatively with Friends in Residence (FIRs): i.e. check to see what is scheduled in building in area where you intend to do work. Work around building usage schedules.
• To ready building for “certificate of Occupancy” inspection date and encourage their attendance at the inspections.
• To do minor construction projects at the direction the Meetinghouse Committee within the limits of this person’s skills.
• To care for flat membrane roof over Meeting Room by sweeping leaves in fall, and sweeping snow in winter. NO SHARP OBJECTS LIKE RAKES AND SHOVELS ARE USED ON THIS ROOF.

The second set of job duties belong to the “Administrative Staff Person”. These could include:

• Aid archivist as needed in organization of files and archives of committees, clerk’s minutes, etc.
• Maintain key list.
• Maintain records of physical plant of Meetinghouse and property, with support of maintenance staff person and Meetinghouse Committee.
• Coordination of some Meeting events?
• Coordination of some purchasing and stocking work or other work for First Day School.
• Support FIR in some tasks such as answering phone.
• Should this role be tied in with professional treasurer position in the future? Accountant and computer skills were thought to be helpful or even a prerequisite.
• Coordination of childcare for Meeting events/meetings.
• Coordination of copying and distribution of announcement sheet.

Friends were asked to consider not “everything a paid staff might possibly do”, but rather, what would help us to do God’s work. We were asked to consider whether, considering the Quaker testimony of simplicity, a task might need to simply be eliminated from the “to do” list if there is inadequate time, rather than assume it would fall to a paid staff person.

Committee Clerks, at the January meeting, felt the need to start with some concrete step, rather than feel stuck within the dilemma of bud meetings vs. one large Meeting with paid staff.

At this time, we bring to MWB this report to spur further prayerful discernment as to next steps. We return to the query, “What are the structures that support the ministries at TCFM? The Committee Clerks did not see enough advantages of bud meetings (when discussed on 1/29) to warrant trying to send out fluid and energy into two different seedpods of our amoeba, and risk preventing any movement forward.

Is TCFM ready to take further steps to explore paid staff? If so, one possible next step would be to take the initial work of job descriptions, and continue work in an ad hoc committee to present at a future MWB.

If not, how do we move this amoeba?

Marianne Clinton-McCausland

Friends participated in a worship sharing to explore, “What are the structures to support the ministries at TCFM? Are Friends ready to explore paid staff at TCFM?”

The following was minuted:

“The sense of meeting was that we are ready to move forward in at least experimenting with paid staff. The clerk will put together an ad hoc committee representing a number of different concerns and sets of experience to address what next steps might be.”

At the May 14, 2006 MWB, Marianne Clinton-McCausland, TCFM Clerk, reported the following:

“The Clerk has appointed an ad hoc committee to look into next steps to consider having paid staff for TCFM. Those appointed and the groups they represent include: Jeremy McAdams, from Nominating Committee; John Martinson from Meetinghouse Committee; Laura Whitley Mott, Friend-in-residence; Jamie Buss, Treasurer; Bob Nechal, previously of Minneapolis Meeting, who brings small business experience; Bob Schmitt from First Day School.”

From the December 10, 2006 Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business:

TCFM Paid Staff Ad Hoc Committee Meeting – Dec. MWB

As part of the period of jubilation in 2005, TCFM asked what we might do to further God’s work in the meeting. To this end, the April 2006 MWB recommended the formation of an ad hoc cmte “to move forward in at least experimenting with paid staff.” In the next month this cmte was formed, composed of Jeremy McAdams, from Nominating Committee; John Martinson, from Meetinghouse Committee; Laura Whitley Mott, Friend-in-residence; Jamie Buss, Treasurer; Bob Nechal, previously of Minneapolis Meeting, who brings small business experience; and Bob Schmitt, from First Day School.

The first milestone for the committee was to prepare a budget proposal for certain items to Development Committee and then the meeting. In the November 2006 MWB, the budget for 2007 was approved, which includes money for paid work for the administrative and maintenance work mentioned in this report. Some of this is a carryover from the 2006 budget.

Maintenance work: Currently we have two types of paid work being done for the meetinghouse. A handiperson, currently Jonetta Martinson, sees to the everyday maintenance of the meetinghouse. Also, there is also paid regular cleaning of the meetinghouse, currently done by a cleaning service. We would now like to pay for a third type of work. There is now provision in the 2007 budget for a meetinghouse building manager, to oversee maintenance and repair of the meetinghouse. In other words, this is the work formerly done by John Martinson. Our expectation is that this work can be done by an independent contractor, but that has not yet been tested. Paid work for maintenance and repair of the meetinghouse may be done by three different individuals, or fewer, up to the discretion of meetinghouse committee.

Administrative work: In 2005 MWB approved paid work in coordinating first day school. We would like to enlarge on this paid administrative work. There is now provision in the budget for bookkeeping duties to support the treasurer, administrative support for Meeting publications and recordkeeping, mail distribution, and maintenance of the keylist. Of course this is a preliminary list that may be revised in time. Also undetermined is whether this work can be done by a single individual, or if we will need to hire a second individual more versed in bookkeeping. As with the maintenance work, our expectation is that this work can be done by an independent contractor, but that has not yet been tested. We expect that most administrative work will be done by the administrative contractor in his or her own office, but we have made provision in the 2007 budget for purchase of a computer. This will aid in keeping the consistency of records, despite changes in paid administrators or in computer software.

To prepare this report, the Ad hoc cmte for paid staff met three times between June and October, 2006. Much of our efforts were in compiling job descriptions, as well as how much and when work could be done to support the meeting and its members. With that laid out before us, we were able to consider how much to ask for from the Meeting to compensate for this added paid work. Our work has been pragmatic and straightforward, because we understand that discernment during the Jubilation year led the meeting in this direction. It seems that paying for work to support the meeting will free us up to further God’s work in the meeting.

From minutes from December 2006 Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business

TCFM Paid Staff Ad Hoc Committee Meeting

In October 2005, a day of Jubilation identified several areas of focus including potentially hiring staff to assist in the both maintenance and the performance of several administrative and clerical tasks of the Meeting. An ad hoc committee was formed consisting of Jeremy McAdams from Nominating Committee; John Martinson from Meetinghouse Committee; Laura Whitley Mott, Friend-in-Residence; Jamie Buss, treasurer; Bob Nechal previously of Minneapolis Meeting who brings small business experience; and Bob Schmitt, previously from First Day School Committee. Jeremy read the committee’s report detailing work identified and a recommendation that the work be done by independent contractors as opposed to the Meeting becoming an employer.

MWB upholds and appreciates the word done by the ad hoc committee. MWB approved Meetinghouse Committee proceeding with contracting a person or persons to take on maintenance responsibilities as described. It is less clear that there is an obvious choice of one committee to oversee the person or persons performing administrative tasks. MWB acknowledges the advantage of centralizing oversight of both functions, yet is aware of the potential of stretching Meetinghouse Committee members beyond their time and knowledge of needs in requesting them to consider oversight of both work functions.

The clerk will communicate with clerks of Meetinghouse Committee to assess their potential interest and ability to do oversight for both maintenance and administrative functions. An agreement to take on this request would involve establishing clear lines of communication between the treasurer, First Day School Committee, and others for assistance in defining work expectations. The ad hoc committee remains available as a resource in defining next steps.

MWB expresses a strong preference for engaging individuals from within the life of the Meeting, although does not hold this as a requirement. In addition, we remain open to exploring whether an employment vs. a contractor model would best define our relationship with these individuals. MWB wishes to choose the model which best meets our needs, despite the learning curve the best model may demand of us.

We are aware this is uncharted territory with many unknowns and hold ourselves and particularly committee clerks in the light as they help us discern further steps.

At the 2/11/07 Meeting for Worship, the Meetinghouse Committee presented a report after considering Meeting’s request that they consider oversight of paid staff. The following was minuted:

Meetinghouse Committee. In December 2006, MWB felt clear to go forward with creating two paid staff positions, one to take responsibility for building management tasks and one for taking on responsibility for clerical and administrative tasks. Ceil Wirth read the report of the Meetinghouse Committee (included with MWB agenda materials.) The Committee does not feel that it can be responsible for recruiting or supervising either of these positions but believes that the Meeting as a whole should bear that responsibility.

In light of this report, MWB asked the clerk to appoint an ad hoc committee to work with the clerk’s team to build on the work already done by the previous ad hoc committee to identify the next steps necessary to move forward. The new committee should have representatives from committees directly involved in the work to be overseen as well as others with time and skill in management and personnel concerns. The committee’s work may include, but not be limited to, listing work responsibilities, publicizing the positions, identifying persons responsible for reviewing applications, and identifying those responsible for supervising the positions once they are engaged.

from minutes for Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business, Feb. 11, 2007

As Friends are most likely aware, TCFM has been experiencing joyful and exuberant growth in the past five years. The Meeting House committee has shared in that joy and exuberance, as well as the growth, in welcoming new members to its structure. The Meeting House committee has also been acutely aware of the difficulty experienced by Nominating committee in finding members and attenders who are able and willing to serve on committees, the problem usually being lack of time due to personal, professional, and other Meeting-centered commitments. Two members of our commitee, John Martinson and Laura Whitley Mott, have represented Meeting House committee on the ad-hoc committee to consider creating paid staff positions, currently titled Building Manager and Administrative Person. The ad-hoc committee has presented their report to Meeting for Business, and from that has come the request to Meeting House committee to consider the possibilities of being responsible for recruiting, hiring, and management/oversight of these two positions.

Meeting House committee met on January 7, 2007 and considered this proposal as a main part of its agenda for that evening. Committee members present for that meeting were: Carol Bartoo, Ceil Wirth, John Martinson, Julie Borgerding-July, Laura Whitley Mott, and Ralph Hilgendorf (absent: Greg Whitley Mott and Gerry Skerbitz). Acutely aware that our committee feels overburdened already with tasks and oversight on a number of parts of keeping TCFM afloat, we were immediately agreed that we cannot take on this responsibility. We believe that the Meeting as a whole needs to “own” this responsibility, that Meeting House committee is only a small part of TCFM as a whole and should not and does not want the amount of power this responsibility would entail. Therefore, we cite and call upon the Meeting as a whole to take on this task.

Meeting House committee recommends the following: that Meeting for Business establish a committee that we have given the working title of “Personnel Committee”, with its membership comprised of representatives from the Meeting at large (both committee members and those not yet on any committee), especially the Trustees, Recorder, and Archivist. This committee would provide management and oversight of the two positions in the areas of recruiting, hiring, supervision, performance reviews, acquisition of needed equipment, etc. Consultation and/or direct help would be given by Meeting House committee for the Building Manager and the same is recommended to be given by First Day School committee for the Administrative Person (since their need appears to be the greatest for utilizing that person).

To that end, Meeting House committee is already studying the need for a securable office space and discussing various options. We have just begun this task.

Respectfully submitted in the Light,
Cecilia (Ceil) Wirth
Co-clerk of Meeting House Committee of Twin Cities Friends Meeting

January 30, 2007

from minutes for Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business, April 1, 2007

An ad hoc committee on paid staff has been formed. It consists of Jamie Buss — Treasurer, Harry Dilworth — News, Ceil Wirth — Meetinghouse, John Martinson — Meetinghouse, Elaine Martin — First Day School, David Shons — business person. A first meeting is being scheduled.

Jubilation — Paid Staff

At the January 8, 2006 Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business (MWB), TCFM Friends participated in a worship sharing regarding utilizing paid staff at TCFM. The following was minuted:

Jubilation followup:

The Clerk summarized the discussions the Meeting held at its last meeting for business, and previously, with regard to the various concerns identified in the Jubilation committee’s work durng 2005.

Terry irish reported on how Minneapolis Friends Meeting uses its part-time administrative assistant to support the meeting, including the types of duties performed, hours worked and wages paid. The clerk then invited Friends into worship sharing to consider the skills, gifts, and responsibilities that would be important if the Meeting proceeds to employ a person in an administrative capacity. Afterwards, the Clerk asked for suggestions for how to proceed.

After discussion, it was clear that Friends have energy to continue discussing the question of paid staff, but also recognize that the concerns that gave rise to the idea of paid staff are complex and interrelated. Focusing discussion on the idea of paid staff is, therefore, to narrow. We also need to discuss the underlyng question, which is how this Meeting can best carry out its ministries. This may include discussion of, among other things, the overall size of our meeting and the special challenges and opportunities posed by having so many families with young children.

Friends agreed that the committee clerks will discuss this concern at their meeting on 29th First Month and will bring further input to the business meeting. Friends are encouraged, as individuals and as small groups, to continue to discuss, gather information, pray, and otherwise actively play a role in helping the meeting decide how to go forward.

At the February 12, 2006 MWB, minutes from the Committee Clerks meeting were included in the Consent Agenda. This included a discussion from committee clerks regarding potential benefit/effect of paid staff at TCFM.

JUBILATION: Out of the recommendation of Friends at January MWB, committees were asked to consider how size of TCFM and the possibility of paid staff might affect the work of their committee. Committee Clerks participated in a worship sharing on the following queries:

What helps us to be faithful to God’s call and carry out God’s work?

How might paid staff be helpful (or not) in helping your committee to carry on God’s work?

Does size of TCFM as a community impact the work of your committee? Is there an optimal size?

Paid Staff:

• Community Service: can help with sign up lists and coordination of Loaves and Fishes and Project Home.
• News Committee: maybe copies from Kinko’s, concern that production of the newsletter falls mostly into one volunteer’s hands — paid staff could help with this.
• Stewardship: paid staff can help with coordination of volunteer efforts, so that we know what others are doing.
• Adult Ed: not much need for paid staff
• Advancement: paid staff could be very helpful with written and phone communication/outreach/coordination.
• M&C: paid staff could help with organization to free up M&C’s time for nurturing, etc.
• Gardens and Grounds: help organize volunteers, and (for example) individuals for snow shoveling.
• Fellowship: not much need for paid staff
• Meetinghouse: has difficulty attracting younger members. There is a need to pass on institutional knowledge (Meetinghouse upkeep, etc. etc. — huge amount of work). Paid staff could help with coordination, record keeping, and perhaps the actual upkeep.
• Development: Fewer Friends volunteering have the administrative skills to do the finances/administration. We need to acknowledge and get paid staff to help.

(Diane Peterson from PSAC was unable to attend this meeting, but e-mailed her opinion that since we are a big congregation, paid staff would help assure that the work gets done. Steve Marchese from Nominating Committee also could not be here today. In a phone chat with Marianne, he echoes sentiments noted above, particularly mentioning building report keeping, book keeping, building management, and coordinating volunteer efforts like Loaves and Fishes and Project Home.)

Size of Meeting: Overall Friends noted that there were more advantages than disadvantages to having a large Meeting. Committee work is enhanced by having more Friends to draw from. First Day School is richer for having more people resources and organization. Listening to God is more important than size of Meeting. One disadvantage is that newcomers sometimes get lost in our large Meeting. Helping newcomers get settled in small worship circles and committee work helps them get grounded.

Jubilation next step: Marianne will publish these minutes in the Consent Agenda for February MWB. Committee clerks (and TCFM Friends in general) are asked to submit to Marianne concrete tasks they would like to see a paid staff do. These will be compiled and act as the focus of further discernment at March MWB.

At the April 9, 2006 MWB, a written Clerk’s report was presented as background for worship sharing regarding paid staff at TCFM.

CLERK’S REPORT

This report summarizes TCFM’s process thus far with respect to the recent Jubilation questions of whether or not to hire paid staff, as it interfaces with the notion of bud Meetings and what size our Meeting should be. We come back to the last query considered in our 2005 year of discernment — “What are the best structures to support our ministries at TCFM?”

At December 11, 2005, MWB, we minuted: “MWB approves budgeting $8000 in the budget for paid staff, but does not authorize spending that money until we decide whether to actually hire paid staff.”

Then, at January 8, 2006, MWB: Friends participated in worship sharing on the idea of hiring paid staff at TCFM, simply as a way to begin to address the Jubilation issues one by one, in manageable steps. We minuted, “After discussion, it was clear that Friends have energy to continue discussing the question of paid staff, but also recognize that the concerns that gave rise to the idea of paid staff are complex and interrelated. Focusing discussion on the idea of paid staff is, therefore, too narrow. We also need to discuss the underlying question, which is how this Meeting can best carry out its ministries. This may include discussion of, among other things, the overall size of our meeting and the special challenges and opportunities posed by having so many families with young children.”

“Friends agreed that the committee clerks will discuss this concern at their meeting on 29th First Month and will bring further input to the business meeting. Friends are encouraged, as individuals and as small groups, to continue to discuss, gather information, pray, and otherwise actively play a role in helping the Meeting decide how to go forward.”

At the Committee Clerks meeting, 1/29/06, Committee clerks discussed both paid staff and size of meeting, as requested by MWB. An initial “job duties” list for a potential paid staff was developed. Regarding size of meeting, overall Friends noted that there are more advantages than disadvantages to having a large Meeting. Committee work is enhanced by having more Friends to draw from. First Day School is richer for having more people resources and organization. Listening to God is more important than size of Meeting. One disadvantage is that newcomers sometimes get lost in our large Meeting. Helping newcomers get settled in small worship circles and committee work helps them get grounded.”

So Friends who attended that particular Committee Clerks Meeting, chose to focus on paid staff — since it seemed, at that time, to be a question of EITHER we remain a large Meeting and consider paid staff, OR we consider bud meetings, likely with less need for paid staff.

The minutes from the 1/29/05 Committee Clerks meeting were published in the Consent Agenda for February MWB. Committee clerks (and TCFM Friends in general) were asked to submit to the TCFM clerk concrete tasks they would like to see a paid staff do. This were to be compiled and act as the focus of further discernment at MWB. As a visual to describe the sense of the Committee Clerks at the 1/29/06 meeting, Richard Fuller described our Meeting as an amoeba at January MWB. “As an amoeba begins to move in a new direction, it may send out a couple areas of early stretched skin and start flowing into both, and it is not capable of moving in both of directions at once. Then, as its sense of direction develops, a choice is made of one pseudopod and the fluid is pulled back out of the other and its stretched skin is re-gathered.”

“I think TCFM will want to proceed in a similar fashion, further exploring the idea of part time help, while not making a final commitment to it at this point, but also extending ourselves in other directions which may turn out to be mutually incompatible in the end, such as setting off one or more bud meetings. I think it is only by putting ourselves into tentative motion that some people will say, ‘Oh my God! This will never do!’ or ‘Oh yes! We should have done this years ago!’ I think it is only by putting the community into motion in tentative directions that we can get the feedback we need to discern which way we really ought to go.”

(Clerk’s comment: I think that at the 1/29/06 Committee Clerks meeting, there was a sense of a little more fluid in the paid staff pseudopod, and thus the desire to focus on this a bit, or the amoeba wouldn’t move. It is critical to be mindful of the other pseudopods, like the bud meeting one, but it seemed like too much to take on in one bite.)

At the March 23, 2006 Committee Clerks meeting, we worked to develop a list of responsibilities for a paid staff person. It should be noted that the makeup of clerks at this meeting was not the same as at the 1/29 meeting. Concern arose as to how ready we were to consider a paid staff person. Would describing a job description lead to a “slippery slope” that presumes that this is what TCFM wants. However, as a springboard for discussion at MWB, we did suggest possibilities of job duties for paid staff person(s) at TCFM. It seemed that two arenas of job responsibilities emerged, which may or may not be performed by one individual.

The first arena revolved around upkeep of the Meetinghouse. John Martinson and the Meetinghouse Committee have worked on an updated Meetinghouse Maintenance Manual which describes in detail the needs for upkeep of our beloved Meetinghouse. Along with this was developed a job description for a “Maintenance Staff Person”. This would likely overlap with the “handyperson” duties which have already been budgeted. Friends expressed gratitude to John and the Meetinghouse Committee for their work.

Responsibilities of a “Maintenance Staff Person”:

• to review the TCFM Maintenance Manual and become familiar with the layout and systems within Twin Cites Friends Meetinghouse
• To do weekly, monthly, yearly checks of building and systems and correct as needed. (Coordinate with Friend in Residence to identify which tasks belong to which position.)
• To contact professionals for annual check-ups and be there when they are scheduled so as to supervise and become more knowledgeable about the operation of TCFM mechanical systems.
• To be on call for emergency needs and arrange professional help as needed.
• To be on call for minor repairs, leaks, etc. and respond in a timely manner.
• To update the TCFM Maintenance Manual as needed.
• To work cooperatively with Friends in Residence (FIRs): i.e. check to see what is scheduled in building in area where you intend to do work. Work around building usage schedules.
• To ready building for “certificate of Occupancy” inspection date and encourage their attendance at the inspections.
• To do minor construction projects at the direction the Meetinghouse Committee within the limits of this person’s skills.
• To care for flat membrane roof over Meeting Room by sweeping leaves in fall, and sweeping snow in winter. NO SHARP OBJECTS LIKE RAKES AND SHOVELS ARE USED ON THIS ROOF.

The second set of job duties belong to the “Administrative Staff Person”. These could include:

• Aid archivist as needed in organization of files and archives of committees, clerk’s minutes, etc.
• Maintain key list.
• Maintain records of physical plant of Meetinghouse and property, with support of maintenance staff person and Meetinghouse Committee.
• Coordination of some Meeting events?
• Coordination of some purchasing and stocking work or other work for First Day School.
• Support FIR in some tasks such as answering phone.
• Should this role be tied in with professional treasurer position in the future? Accountant and computer skills were thought to be helpful or even a prerequisite.
• Coordination of childcare for Meeting events/meetings.
• Coordination of copying and distribution of announcement sheet.

Friends were asked to consider not “everything a paid staff might possibly do”, but rather, what would help us to do God’s work. We were asked to consider whether, considering the Quaker testimony of simplicity, a task might need to simply be eliminated from the “to do” list if there is inadequate time, rather than assume it would fall to a paid staff person.

Committee Clerks, at the January meeting, felt the need to start with some concrete step, rather than feel stuck within the dilemma of bud meetings vs. one large Meeting with paid staff.

At this time, we bring to MWB this report to spur further prayerful discernment as to next steps. We return to the query, “What are the structures that support the ministries at TCFM? The Committee Clerks did not see enough advantages of bud meetings (when discussed on 1/29) to warrant trying to send out fluid and energy into two different seedpods of our amoeba, and risk preventing any movement forward.

Is TCFM ready to take further steps to explore paid staff? If so, one possible next step would be to take the initial work of job descriptions, and continue work in an ad hoc committee to present at a future MWB.

If not, how do we move this amoeba?

Marianne Clinton-McCausland

Friends participated in a worship sharing to explore, “What are the structures to support the ministries at TCFM? Are Friends ready to explore paid staff at TCFM?”

The following was minuted:

“The sense of meeting was that we are ready to move forward in at least experimenting with paid staff. The clerk will put together an ad hoc committee representing a number of different concerns and sets of experience to address what next steps might be.”

At the May 14, 2006 MWB, Marianne Clinton-McCausland, TCFM Clerk, reported the following:

“The Clerk has appointed an ad hoc committee to look into next steps to consider having paid staff for TCFM. Those appointed and the groups they represent include: Jeremy McAdams, from Nominating Committee; John Martinson from Meetinghouse Committee; Laura Whitley Mott, Friend-in-residence; Jamie Buss, Treasurer; Bob Nechal, previously of Minneapolis Meeting, who brings small business experience; Bob Schmitt from First Day School.”

From the December 10, 2006 Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business:

TCFM Paid Staff Ad Hoc Committee Meeting – Dec. MWB

As part of the period of jubilation in 2005, TCFM asked what we might do to further God’s work in the meeting. To this end, the April 2006 MWB recommended the formation of an ad hoc cmte “to move forward in at least experimenting with paid staff.” In the next month this cmte was formed, composed of Jeremy McAdams, from Nominating Committee; John Martinson, from Meetinghouse Committee; Laura Whitley Mott, Friend-in-residence; Jamie Buss, Treasurer; Bob Nechal, previously of Minneapolis Meeting, who brings small business experience; and Bob Schmitt, from First Day School.

The first milestone for the committee was to prepare a budget proposal for certain items to Development Committee and then the meeting. In the November 2006 MWB, the budget for 2007 was approved, which includes money for paid work for the administrative and maintenance work mentioned in this report. Some of this is a carryover from the 2006 budget.

Maintenance work: Currently we have two types of paid work being done for the meetinghouse. A handiperson, currently Jonetta Martinson, sees to the everyday maintenance of the meetinghouse. Also, there is also paid regular cleaning of the meetinghouse, currently done by a cleaning service. We would now like to pay for a third type of work. There is now provision in the 2007 budget for a meetinghouse building manager, to oversee maintenance and repair of the meetinghouse. In other words, this is the work formerly done by John Martinson. Our expectation is that this work can be done by an independent contractor, but that has not yet been tested. Paid work for maintenance and repair of the meetinghouse may be done by three different individuals, or fewer, up to the discretion of meetinghouse committee.

Administrative work: In 2005 MWB approved paid work in coordinating first day school. We would like to enlarge on this paid administrative work. There is now provision in the budget for bookkeeping duties to support the treasurer, administrative support for Meeting publications and recordkeeping, mail distribution, and maintenance of the keylist. Of course this is a preliminary list that may be revised in time. Also undetermined is whether this work can be done by a single individual, or if we will need to hire a second individual more versed in bookkeeping. As with the maintenance work, our expectation is that this work can be done by an independent contractor, but that has not yet been tested. We expect that most administrative work will be done by the administrative contractor in his or her own office, but we have made provision in the 2007 budget for purchase of a computer. This will aid in keeping the consistency of records, despite changes in paid administrators or in computer software.

To prepare this report, the Ad hoc cmte for paid staff met three times between June and October, 2006. Much of our efforts were in compiling job descriptions, as well as how much and when work could be done to support the meeting and its members. With that laid out before us, we were able to consider how much to ask for from the Meeting to compensate for this added paid work. Our work has been pragmatic and straightforward, because we understand that discernment during the Jubilation year led the meeting in this direction. It seems that paying for work to support the meeting will free us up to further God’s work in the meeting.

From minutes from December 2006 Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business

TCFM Paid Staff Ad Hoc Committee Meeting

In October 2005, a day of Jubilation identified several areas of focus including potentially hiring staff to assist in the both maintenance and the performance of several administrative and clerical tasks of the Meeting. An ad hoc committee was formed consisting of Jeremy McAdams from Nominating Committee; John Martinson from Meetinghouse Committee; Laura Whitley Mott, Friend-in-Residence; Jamie Buss, treasurer; Bob Nechal previously of Minneapolis Meeting who brings small business experience; and Bob Schmitt, previously from First Day School Committee. Jeremy read the committee’s report detailing work identified and a recommendation that the work be done by independent contractors as opposed to the Meeting becoming an employer.

MWB upholds and appreciates the word done by the ad hoc committee. MWB approved Meetinghouse Committee proceeding with contracting a person or persons to take on maintenance responsibilities as described. It is less clear that there is an obvious choice of one committee to oversee the person or persons performing administrative tasks. MWB acknowledges the advantage of centralizing oversight of both functions, yet is aware of the potential of stretching Meetinghouse Committee members beyond their time and knowledge of needs in requesting them to consider oversight of both work functions.

The clerk will communicate with clerks of Meetinghouse Committee to assess their potential interest and ability to do oversight for both maintenance and administrative functions. An agreement to take on this request would involve establishing clear lines of communication between the treasurer, First Day School Committee, and others for assistance in defining work expectations. The ad hoc committee remains available as a resource in defining next steps.

MWB expresses a strong preference for engaging individuals from within the life of the Meeting, although does not hold this as a requirement. In addition, we remain open to exploring whether an employment vs. a contractor model would best define our relationship with these individuals. MWB wishes to choose the model which best meets our needs, despite the learning curve the best model may demand of us.

We are aware this is uncharted territory with many unknowns and hold ourselves and particularly committee clerks in the light as they help us discern further steps.

At the 2/11/07 Meeting for Worship, the Meetinghouse Committee presented a report after considering Meeting’s request that they consider oversight of paid staff. The following was minuted:

Meetinghouse Committee. In December 2006, MWB felt clear to go forward with creating two paid staff positions, one to take responsibility for building management tasks and one for taking on responsibility for clerical and administrative tasks. Ceil Wirth read the report of the Meetinghouse Committee (included with MWB agenda materials.) The Committee does not feel that it can be responsible for recruiting or supervising either of these positions but believes that the Meeting as a whole should bear that responsibility.

In light of this report, MWB asked the clerk to appoint an ad hoc committee to work with the clerk’s team to build on the work already done by the previous ad hoc committee to identify the next steps necessary to move forward. The new committee should have representatives from committees directly involved in the work to be overseen as well as others with time and skill in management and personnel concerns. The committee’s work may include, but not be limited to, listing work responsibilities, publicizing the positions, identifying persons responsible for reviewing applications, and identifying those responsible for supervising the positions once they are engaged.

from minutes for Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business, Feb. 11, 2007

As Friends are most likely aware, TCFM has been experiencing joyful and exuberant growth in the past five years. The Meeting House committee has shared in that joy and exuberance, as well as the growth, in welcoming new members to its structure. The Meeting House committee has also been acutely aware of the difficulty experienced by Nominating committee in finding members and attenders who are able and willing to serve on committees, the problem usually being lack of time due to personal, professional, and other Meeting-centered commitments. Two members of our commitee, John Martinson and Laura Whitley Mott, have represented Meeting House committee on the ad-hoc committee to consider creating paid staff positions, currently titled Building Manager and Administrative Person. The ad-hoc committee has presented their report to Meeting for Business, and from that has come the request to Meeting House committee to consider the possibilities of being responsible for recruiting, hiring, and management/oversight of these two positions.

Meeting House committee met on January 7, 2007 and considered this proposal as a main part of its agenda for that evening. Committee members present for that meeting were: Carol Bartoo, Ceil Wirth, John Martinson, Julie Borgerding-July, Laura Whitley Mott, and Ralph Hilgendorf (absent: Greg Whitley Mott and Gerry Skerbitz). Acutely aware that our committee feels overburdened already with tasks and oversight on a number of parts of keeping TCFM afloat, we were immediately agreed that we cannot take on this responsibility. We believe that the Meeting as a whole needs to “own” this responsibility, that Meeting House committee is only a small part of TCFM as a whole and should not and does not want the amount of power this responsibility would entail. Therefore, we cite and call upon the Meeting as a whole to take on this task.

Meeting House committee recommends the following: that Meeting for Business establish a committee that we have given the working title of “Personnel Committee”, with its membership comprised of representatives from the Meeting at large (both committee members and those not yet on any committee), especially the Trustees, Recorder, and Archivist. This committee would provide management and oversight of the two positions in the areas of recruiting, hiring, supervision, performance reviews, acquisition of needed equipment, etc. Consultation and/or direct help would be given by Meeting House committee for the Building Manager and the same is recommended to be given by First Day School committee for the Administrative Person (since their need appears to be the greatest for utilizing that person).

To that end, Meeting House committee is already studying the need for a securable office space and discussing various options. We have just begun this task.

Respectfully submitted in the Light,
Cecilia (Ceil) Wirth
Co-clerk of Meeting House Committee of Twin Cities Friends Meeting

January 30, 2007

from minutes for Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business, April 1, 2007

An ad hoc committee on paid staff has been formed. It consists of Jamie Buss — Treasurer, Harry Dilworth — News, Ceil Wirth — Meetinghouse, John Martinson — Meetinghouse, Elaine Martin — First Day School, David Shons — business person. A first meeting is being scheduled.

An ad hoc committee on paid staff has been formed.  It consists of Jamie Buss — Treasurer, Harry Dilworth — News, Ceil Wirth — Meetinghouse, John Martinson — Meetinghouse, Elaine Martin — First Day School, David Shons — business person.  A first meeting is being scheduled.

As Friends are most likely aware, TCFM has been experiencing joyful and exuberant growth in the past five years. The Meeting House committee has shared in that joy and exuberance, as well as the growth, in welcoming new members to its structure. The Meeting House committee has also been acutely aware of the difficulty experienced by Nominating committee in finding members and attenders who are able and willing to serve on committees, the problem usually being lack of time due to personal, professional, and other Meeting-centered commitments. Two members of our commitee, John Martinson and Laura Whitley Mott, have represented Meeting House committee on the ad-hoc committee to consider creating paid staff positions, currently titled Building Manager and Administrative Person. The ad-hoc committee has presented their report to Meeting for Business, and from that has come the request to Meeting House committee to consider the possibilities of being responsible for recruiting, hiring, and management/oversight of these two positions.

Meeting House committee met on January 7, 2007 and considered this proposal as a main part of its agenda for that evening. Committee members present for that meeting were: Carol Bartoo, Ceil Wirth, John Martinson, Julie Borgerding-July, Laura Whitley Mott, and Ralph Hilgendorf (absent: Greg Whitley Mott and Gerry Skerbitz). Acutely aware that our committee feels overburdened already with tasks and oversight on a number of parts of keeping TCFM afloat, we were immediately agreed that we cannot take on this responsibility. We believe that the Meeting as a whole needs to “own” this responsibility, that Meeting House committee is only a small part of TCFM as a whole and should not and does not want the amount of power this responsibility would entail. Therefore, we cite and call upon the Meeting as a whole to take on this task.

Meeting House committee recommends the following: that Meeting for Business establish a committee that we have given the working title of “Personnel Committee”, with its membership comprised of representatives from the Meeting at large (both committee members and those not yet on any committee), especially the Trustees, Recorder, and Archivist. This committee would provide management and oversight of the two positions in the areas of recruiting, hiring, supervision, performance reviews, acquisition of needed equipment, etc. Consultation and/or direct help would be given by Meeting House committee for the Building Manager and the same is recommended to be given by First Day School committee for the Administrative Person (since their need appears to be the greatest for utilizing that person).

To that end, Meeting House committee is already studying the need for a securable office space and discussing various options. We have just begun this task.

Respectfully submitted in the Light,
Cecilia (Ceil) Wirth
Co-clerk of Meeting House Committee of Twin Cities Friends Meeting

January 30, 2007

As Friends are most likely aware, TCFM has been experiencing joyful and exuberant growth in the past five years. The Meeting House committee has shared in that joy and exuberance, as well as the growth, in welcoming new members to its structure. The Meeting House committee has also been acutely aware of the difficulty experienced by Nominating committee in finding members and attenders who are able and willing to serve on committees, the problem usually being lack of time due to personal, professional, and other Meeting-centered commitments. Two members of our commitee, John Martinson and Laura Whitley Mott, have represented Meeting House committee on the ad-hoc committee to consider creating paid staff positions, currently titled Building Manager and Administrative Person. The ad-hoc committee has presented their report to Meeting for Business, and from that has come the request to Meeting House committee to consider the possibilities of being responsible for recruiting, hiring, and management/oversight of these two positions.

Meeting House committee met on January 7, 2007 and considered this proposal as a main part of its agenda for that evening. Committee members present for that meeting were: Carol Bartoo, Ceil Wirth, John Martinson, Julie Borgerding-July, Laura Whitley Mott, and Ralph Hilgendorf (absent: Greg Whitley Mott and Gerry Skerbitz). Acutely aware that our committee feels overburdened already with tasks and oversight on a number of parts of keeping TCFM afloat, we were immediately agreed that we cannot take on this responsibility. We believe that the Meeting as a whole needs to “own” this responsibility, that Meeting House committee is only a small part of TCFM as a whole and should not and does not want the amount of power this responsibility would entail. Therefore, we cite and call upon the Meeting as a whole to take on this task.

Meeting House committee recommends the following: that Meeting for Business establish a committee that we have given the working title of “Personnel Committee”, with its membership comprised of representatives from the Meeting at large (both committee members and those not yet on any committee), especially the Trustees, Recorder, and Archivist. This committee would provide management and oversight of the two positions in the areas of recruiting, hiring, supervision, performance reviews, acquisition of needed equipment, etc. Consultation and/or direct help would be given by Meeting House committee for the Building Manager and the same is recommended to be given by First Day School committee for the Administrative Person (since their need appears to be the greatest for utilizing that person).

To that end, Meeting House committee is already studying the need for a securable office space and discussing various options. We have just begun this task.

Respectfully submitted in the Light,
Cecilia (Ceil) Wirth
Co-clerk of Meeting House Committee of Twin Cities Friends Meeting

January 30, 2007

Physical space: this item was spoken about most fervently by First Day School Committee during the year of Jubilation. At that time, they had seen an acceleratiing number of young Friends over a period of years, which had stretched existing space to the limit. Recently, Marianne Clinton-McCausland attended a First Day School committee Meeting. At this point, the number of First Day School students seems to have leveled for now. The First Day School Committee feels easy with taking a breath and seeing how things develop.

Physical space: this item was spoken about most fervently by First Day School Committee during the year of Jubilation. At that time, they had seen an acceleratiing number of young Friends over a period of years, which had stretched existing space to the limit. Recently, Marianne Clinton-McCausland attended a First Day School committee Meeting. At this point, the number of First Day School students seems to have leveled for now. The First Day School Committee feels easy with taking a breath and seeing how things develop.

In 2005, TCFM Friends joined in worship sharings, business meetings, ad hoc committee meetings, potlucks, and holding each other in the Light — all part of a process of spiritual discernment. We named this year of discernment and the process, JUBILATION.

We were asked to hold the following two queries:

• What are the ministries of the Twin Cities Friends Meeting?
• What are the best structures to support these ministries?

For many, this process has been a central one to help us move forward as a Meeting community — to see the way ahead. However, this process has been effected over several years, if we include the planning, actualizing and living in the aftermath of this year of discernment. With such duration and intensity of effort, and new Friends joining, there has sometimes been difficulty in retaining our “institutional memory”.

For that reason, this website has been developed to allow Friends to get caught up, and actively participate in our continued discernment.

What follows are snippets and reports from various TCFM meetings since March of 2004. This serves to share the background and history of this process, culminating with what are TCFM’s current projects which arose out of the Jubilation year of discernment.

Well before the 2005 Jubilation year, Twin Cities Friends Meeting sensed the need to dig deep and discern its direction. In December, 2003, the Nominating Committee raised the concern at the Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business (MWB) that it was often difficult to find Friends willing to serve on various committees. Out of this MWB was formed an ad hoc committee.

The following was minuted at the March, 2004 MWB:

Ad Hoc Committee for Nominating Concerns (Robin Fox)

An ad hoc committee was formed at the December MFB after hearing about the small size of Nominating Committee and the difficulties of recruiting Friends for committee work. This ad hoc committee met twice and presented a report (available at tcfm.org) suggesting a number of approaches to addressing related issues.

Discussion acknowledged the deep importance of the issues, the complexities in Meeting pertaining to them, and their relevance to long range planning. MFB agreed to convene one or more called Meetings on the issues raised. The clerk’s team will appoint a small committee representative of a number of groups within Meeting to help define the issue and shape the called Meetings.

This ad hoc committee consisted of Elizabeth Barnard, Nat Chase, Martha Hardy, Liz Oppenheimer, Jodi Sandfort (clerk), and Bob Schmitt. They first presented the following report for the MWB consent agenda in June, 2004:

Report from the Ad Hoc Committee on Nominating Concerns
5/29/04

Members: Elizabeth Barnard, Nat Chase, Martha Hardy, Liz Oppenheimer, Jodi Sandfort (clerk), Bob Schmidt.

In March, Meeting for Worship with attention to Business received a report from an Ad Hoc Committee formed to investigate the challenges confronting the community regarding committee service. At that meeting, it was decided that another committee should be formed through invitations by the Clerk – to reflect different subgroups within the community — to delve more deeply into this question. This new committee has met two times since being created and will meet again on June 12th.

As we have explored the nature of the nominations challenges, it seems clear that many large issues of community health could be potential causes of this problem. While the committee members are gathering information through informal conversations with Meeting members and attenders, we are sensing that this issue has significant implications for the whole community. It is becoming clear that a Called Meeting to address these issues would likely benefit us all. We currently are working to develop a format, structure, and date for the Called Meeting to allow for spirit-rich and wide participation in the gathering.

Submitted by Jodi Sandfort

A Called Meeting for Business with Attention to Nomination Concerns was held October 31, 2004. (Click here for newsletter including minutes from that meeting.)

The following is excerpted from the minutes of this meeting:

Following worship sharing, the ad hoc committee summarized its findings as follows:

1. There is already a high level of engagement among members and attenders at TCFM. However, instead of celebration of the engagement that exists, we are made aware of the inadequacies.
2. We need better processes/mechanisms in place to help people be aware of opportunities for service?

In light of these observations the ad hoc committee makes these suggestions:

Could we spend the year 2005 in reflection to answer these questions:

• What are the ministries of TCFM?
• What are the structures to support these ministries?

This year of discernment was initially named “Jubilee”. But in part because of the confusion of the use of this Biblical term, the name of the year of discernment was changed to “Jubilation”.

Charged by TCFM Friends, the Jubilation Committee first met in 2005 on January 14. At this point, committee members included Elizabeth Barnard, Jean Hammink, Jenny Larson, Jodi Sandfort (clerk), and Bob Schmitt. Mary Ellen Shaw, as TCFM Assistant Clerk, acted as liaison with the TCFM Clerk’s team. The committee reported at the January MWB.

Report
Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business
January 2005

Jubilation Committee, ad hoc Committee on Nominations Concerns A new ad hoc committee has been formed by the clerks team to carry forward the work of creating a plan for the TCFM to engage in a process of discernment during 2005 around two questions:

• What are the ministries of the Twin Cities Friends Meeting?
• What are the best structures to support these ministries?

The group is comprised of Elizabeth Barnard, Jean Hammink, Jenny Larson, Jodi Sandfort (clerk), and Bob Schmitt. We have decided to call ourselves the “Jubilation Committee,” to capture the joyousness that we see infusing all aspects of the process. In our first meeting, we decided to lay down the formal concept of a “Jubilee Year” because of the ambiguity of the term and the uncertainty it evoked. We will try to embody the process with glee throughout, with the name of this committee, the use of symbols and celebratory events.

The committee would like to propose that the first part of 2005 be spent exploring the first question in many different forms and forums. Then, we will later turn to the second question.

In our planning, we considered both what could be done to explore the first question and how it could be done. We decided that Queries are a powerful tool to assist the community in discernment. We agreed that we would posit a particular Query every month or two for the community to consider. For January and February 2005, we will first ask, “What is the core of a Quaker Meeting for you?” We discussed exploring this question in a number of different forums:

• January 9th Friends Forum
• January 23rd Chili lunch being organized by the First Day School committee
• January Inter-generational Worship
• Other ideas are being explored with other members of the meeting, including members of Ministry & Counsel and Advancement committees.

In general, it is the goal of the group to utilize many different gathering of Friends and focus on the various queries as they are developed. The committee will develop a way of “gathering up” information shared by these gatherings to help each inform the larger process of community discernment. As noted above, the whole group is committed to having a feeling of celebration permeate this whole process. We realize that we are facing these structural challenges because of the success of the community – TCFM has grown more than our founders could have imagined. We now need to revisit how we are organized to take advantage of the energy and skills that so many newcomers bring to our community, yet preserve the sense of intimacy and deep spirituality that drew so many in the first place.

Mary Ellen Shaw plans to attend committee meetings to assure ongoing coordination and communication with the clerk’s team.

The first assigned question for discernment, “What are the ministries of the Twin Cities Friends Meeting?” was approached via two queries:

1. What is the core of a Quaker Meeting for you? and
2. How do you experience and care for the Light within you?

Over the first few months of 2005, a number of venues were used to allow as many TCFM Friends as possible to hold these queries in the Light, and to collect this wisdom. Venues used included: scheduled worship sharing, potlucks, intergenerational worship, Friends Forum, First Day school lunch, and February Meeting for Business. The spirit of Jubilation was punctuated with colorful posters and balloons. The Jubilation Committee presented their experience and progress at the April, 2005 MWB:

In January, a report was brought to MWB about the work of a TCFM ad hoc committee, the Jubilation Committee, formed by the clerks team to carry out process of community discernment in 2005 around two central questions: First, what are the ministries of the Twin Cities Friends Meeting? Second, what are the best structures to support these ministries? In that report, the committee explained that the first part of the year would be spent on the first question, using Queries as a tool for collective discernment. That report also highlighted a number of strategies for presenting the Queries for community consideration.

In this report, the committee would like to update the Meeting on our progress to date and our plans going forward.

Progress to date

During the first three months of this year, we formed the Queries and laid out a plan to guide our collective discernment process to better understand the ministries of the TCFM community. We also established a data-base that allows us to collect people’s responses and analyze them for themes. This will prove invaluable in the second half of the year when we turn to considering the best structures that support these ministries.

We began by asking a first query, “What is the core of a Quaker Meeting for you?” during January and February through a number of different forums. We held worship sharing at Friends Forum, First Day school lunch, inter-generational worship (January), and February meeting for business. We prepared informational packets for committee clerks and asked that they hold worship sharing with their committees. We made weekly announcements and included information in the community newsletter. We had a community-forum exchanged be created on the TCFM web site. To reach attenders who are not currently involved in the Meeting structure, we made posters and encouraged people to fill in sheets with their responses to the Query. We also tried to make the overall process visible by having a colorful logo, information sheets widely available, and by having celebratory balloons at potluck during January and March.

During the middle of March, we introduced the second query to the community, “How do you experience and care for the Light within you?” Using the same mechanisms as described above, we will work to assure this Query is explored by community members until mid-May. Worship sharing about this Query will occur at the April Meeting for Worship with attention to Business.

Plans going forward

In mid-May, we plan to begin to explore the final set of queries: How do you share your spiritual gifts with the community? What do you need from the community to share these gifts? Again, we will plan to explore these questions in as many different settings as possible to allow for maximum community input.

As noted above, the results of this discernment is being collected in notes. All notes are being entered into a database that allows for complete cataloguing; it also will facilitate the analysis of major themes. This information will be combined with other information, most notably the current survey being conducted by the Nominations Committee about people’s willingness to serve on committees, to fully flesh out how the community defines our ministries.

The Jubilation Committee plans on facilitating a day-long gathering on Saturday, July 30th (from 9:00 to 3:00) to discuss these findings with the community and begin to turn to the question of how to create structures that support the ministries. While the specifics have not been decided upon, our initial thinking is that we would work with Nominating Committee, the Clerk’s team, Ministry & Counsel, and representatives from all existing committees at this gathering. We intend this process to be as inclusive as possible.

We will plan on making another report to MWB with more details about that gathering as the date grows nearer.

Respectfully –

Jodi Sandfort (clerk) on behalf of the committee comprised of Elizabeth Barnard, Jean Hammink, Jenny Larson, and Bob Schmitt. Mary Ellen Shaw has also regularly attended our meetings to facilitate communication with the clerk’s team

In order to approach the second overarching question in the Jubilation process — “What are the best structures to support these ministries?” — two more queries were introduced in the second half of 2005:
1. How do you share your spiritual gifts with the community? and
2. What do you need from the community to share these gifts?

Over the next several months, it was unclear whether or not energy was waning among TCFM Friends to pursue these important questions. Nevertheless, a Day of Discernment was held on October 29, 2006 to explore what had been learned in our year of discernment to that point. A large and enthusiastic group of TCFM Friends gathered that day, affirming that this year of Jubilation and discernment had been an important and formative one. A report of this gathering was presented at the December, 2005 Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business.

• Final Report from the Jubilation Committee, December 2005

This report, with the support of the TCFM community, was then used as a “roadmap” for further exploration and experimentation in 2006 to answer the query, “What are the structures which support the ministries at Twin Cities Friends Meeting?”

Charged by TCFM Friends, the Jubilation Committee first met in 2005 on January 14. At this point, committee members included Elizabeth Barnard, Jean Hammink, Jenny Larson, Jodi Sandfort (clerk), and Bob Schmitt. Mary Ellen Shaw, as TCFM Assistant Clerk, acted as liaison with the TCFM Clerk’s team. The committee reported at the January MWB.

Report
Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business
January 2005

Jubilation Committee, ad hoc Committee on Nominations Concerns A new ad hoc committee has been formed by the clerks team to carry forward the work of creating a plan for the TCFM to engage in a process of discernment during 2005 around two questions:

• What are the ministries of the Twin Cities Friends Meeting?
• What are the best structures to support these ministries?

The group is comprised of Elizabeth Barnard, Jean Hammink, Jenny Larson, Jodi Sandfort (clerk), and Bob Schmitt. We have decided to call ourselves the “Jubilation Committee,” to capture the joyousness that we see infusing all aspects of the process. In our first meeting, we decided to lay down the formal concept of a “Jubilee Year” because of the ambiguity of the term and the uncertainty it evoked. We will try to embody the process with glee throughout, with the name of this committee, the use of symbols and celebratory events.

The committee would like to propose that the first part of 2005 be spent exploring the first question in many different forms and forums. Then, we will later turn to the second question.

In our planning, we considered both what could be done to explore the first question and how it could be done. We decided that Queries are a powerful tool to assist the community in discernment. We agreed that we would posit a particular Query every month or two for the community to consider. For January and February 2005, we will first ask, “What is the core of a Quaker Meeting for you?” We discussed exploring this question in a number of different forums:

• January 9th Friends Forum
• January 23rd Chili lunch being organized by the First Day School committee
• January Inter-generational Worship
• Other ideas are being explored with other members of the meeting, including members of Ministry & Counsel and Advancement committees.

In general, it is the goal of the group to utilize many different gathering of Friends and focus on the various queries as they are developed. The committee will develop a way of “gathering up” information shared by these gatherings to help each inform the larger process of community discernment. As noted above, the whole group is committed to having a feeling of celebration permeate this whole process. We realize that we are facing these structural challenges because of the success of the community – TCFM has grown more than our founders could have imagined. We now need to revisit how we are organized to take advantage of the energy and skills that so many newcomers bring to our community, yet preserve the sense of intimacy and deep spirituality that drew so many in the first place.

Mary Ellen Shaw plans to attend committee meetings to assure ongoing coordination and communication with the clerk’s team.

The first assigned question for discernment, “What are the ministries of the Twin Cities Friends Meeting?” was approached via two queries:

1. What is the core of a Quaker Meeting for you? and
2. How do you experience and care for the Light within you?

Over the first few months of 2005, a number of venues were used to allow as many TCFM Friends as possible to hold these queries in the Light, and to collect this wisdom. Venues used included: scheduled worship sharing, potlucks, intergenerational worship, Friends Forum, First Day school lunch, and February Meeting for Business. The spirit of Jubilation was punctuated with colorful posters and balloons. The Jubilation Committee presented their experience and progress at the April, 2005 MWB:

In January, a report was brought to MWB about the work of a TCFM ad hoc committee, the Jubilation Committee, formed by the clerks team to carry out process of community discernment in 2005 around two central questions: First, what are the ministries of the Twin Cities Friends Meeting? Second, what are the best structures to support these ministries? In that report, the committee explained that the first part of the year would be spent on the first question, using Queries as a tool for collective discernment. That report also highlighted a number of strategies for presenting the Queries for community consideration.

In this report, the committee would like to update the Meeting on our progress to date and our plans going forward.

Progress to date

During the first three months of this year, we formed the Queries and laid out a plan to guide our collective discernment process to better understand the ministries of the TCFM community. We also established a data-base that allows us to collect people’s responses and analyze them for themes. This will prove invaluable in the second half of the year when we turn to considering the best structures that support these ministries.

We began by asking a first query, “What is the core of a Quaker Meeting for you?” during January and February through a number of different forums. We held worship sharing at Friends Forum, First Day school lunch, inter-generational worship (January), and February meeting for business. We prepared informational packets for committee clerks and asked that they hold worship sharing with their committees. We made weekly announcements and included information in the community newsletter. We had a community-forum exchanged be created on the TCFM web site. To reach attenders who are not currently involved in the Meeting structure, we made posters and encouraged people to fill in sheets with their responses to the Query. We also tried to make the overall process visible by having a colorful logo, information sheets widely available, and by having celebratory balloons at potluck during January and March.

During the middle of March, we introduced the second query to the community, “How do you experience and care for the Light within you?” Using the same mechanisms as described above, we will work to assure this Query is explored by community members until mid-May. Worship sharing about this Query will occur at the April Meeting for Worship with attention to Business.

Plans going forward

In mid-May, we plan to begin to explore the final set of queries: How do you share your spiritual gifts with the community? What do you need from the community to share these gifts? Again, we will plan to explore these questions in as many different settings as possible to allow for maximum community input.

As noted above, the results of this discernment is being collected in notes. All notes are being entered into a database that allows for complete cataloguing; it also will facilitate the analysis of major themes. This information will be combined with other information, most notably the current survey being conducted by the Nominations Committee about people’s willingness to serve on committees, to fully flesh out how the community defines our ministries.

The Jubilation Committee plans on facilitating a day-long gathering on Saturday, July 30th (from 9:00 to 3:00) to discuss these findings with the community and begin to turn to the question of how to create structures that support the ministries. While the specifics have not been decided upon, our initial thinking is that we would work with Nominating Committee, the Clerk’s team, Ministry & Counsel, and representatives from all existing committees at this gathering. We intend this process to be as inclusive as possible.

We will plan on making another report to MWB with more details about that gathering as the date grows nearer.

Respectfully –

Jodi Sandfort (clerk) on behalf of the committee comprised of Elizabeth Barnard, Jean Hammink, Jenny Larson, and Bob Schmitt. Mary Ellen Shaw has also regularly attended our meetings to facilitate communication with the clerk’s team

In order to approach the second overarching question in the Jubilation process — “What are the best structures to support these ministries?” — two more queries were introduced in the second half of 2005:
1. How do you share your spiritual gifts with the community? and
2. What do you need from the community to share these gifts?

Over the next several months, it was unclear whether or not energy was waning among TCFM Friends to pursue these important questions. Nevertheless, a Day of Discernment was held on October 29, 2006 to explore what had been learned in our year of discernment to that point. A large and enthusiastic group of TCFM Friends gathered that day, affirming that this year of Jubilation and discernment had been an important and formative one. A report of this gathering was presented at the December, 2005 Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business.

• Final Report from the Jubilation Committee, December 2005

This report, with the support of the TCFM community, was then used as a “roadmap” for further exploration and experimentation in 2006 to answer the query, “What are the structures which support the ministries at Twin Cities Friends Meeting?”

At the December 11, 2005 Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business (MWB), the ad hoc Jubilation Committee presented their “Final Report from the Jubilation Committee”. At this Meeting, the ad hoc committee was laid down, with expressed appreciation for their Spirit-led work.

From this report, and the collective wisdom of TCFM Friends, the Clerk’s team selected three pragmatic issues as starting points for discerning next steps in the Jubilation process:

1. Paid staff — are TCFM Friends ready to consider one or more paid staff to assist in our work?
2. Size of Meeting — what is the optimal size of Twin Cities Friends Meeting (TCFM)? Are we too big? What would it mean to form “bud Meetings” or to divide Meeting? How would this be done?
3. Physical space — the number of young Friends has grown at TCFM. Does our current physical space accommodate this wonderful energy? What are our short term and long term goals?

Weaving through consideration of these practical concerns are the queries “How does Spirit lead us?” and “What are the best structures to support the ministries at Twin Cities Friends Meeting?”

And as convenient and simple it may appear to consider these issues one by one, TCFM Friends are aware they all interrelate. At the January 8, 2006 MWB, one Friend spoke of the relationship of our community concerns being like an amoeba. In order to make movement as a community, realistically, we can only move one pseudopod forward at a time.

This was beautifully articulated in an article printed in the Second Month, 2006 TCFM Newsletter. The Personal Voices essay, “The Amoeba Analogy” was written by Richard Fuller, as presented at the January 8, 2006 MWB.

Personal Voices The Amoeba Analogy by Richard Fuller

It seems to me that in the year ahead TCFM should move into its new directions in a manner similar to the way an amoeba moves.

Amoebas are single-celled animals that are basically fluid inside a flexible skin. They move by pouring part of their fluid into some stretched area of skin and then flowing the rest of them in behind the first part and pulling up the extra skin that was where the fluid used to be. That fresh stretched area of skin they pour themselves into is called a “pseudopod” (fake foot).

As an amoeba begins to move in a new direction, it may send out a couple areas of early stretched skin and start flowing into both of them, even though there is not enough inner fluid to fill them both, and it is not capable of moving in both of the directions at once. Then, as its sense of direction develops, a choice is made for one pseudopod and the fluid is pulled back out other and its stretched skin is re-gathered.

I think TCFM will want to proceed in a similar fashion, further exploring the idea of part time help, while not making a final commitment to it at this point, but also extending ourselves in other directions which may turn out to be mutually incompatible in the end, such as setting off one or more bud meetings. I think it is only by putting ourselves into tentative motion that some people will say, “Oh my God! This will never do!” or “Oh yes! We should have done this years ago!” I think it is only by putting the community into motion in tentative directions that we can get the feedback we need to discern which way we really ought to go.

How is our amoeba moving?

At the December 11, 2005 Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business (MWB), the ad hoc Jubilation Committee presented their “Final Report from the Jubilation Committee”. At this Meeting, the ad hoc committee was laid down, with expressed appreciation for their Spirit-led work.

From this report, and the collective wisdom of TCFM Friends, the Clerk’s team selected three pragmatic issues as starting points for discerning next steps in the Jubilation process:

1. Paid staff — are TCFM Friends ready to consider one or more paid staff to assist in our work?
2. Size of Meeting — what is the optimal size of Twin Cities Friends Meeting (TCFM)? Are we too big? What would it mean to form “bud Meetings” or to divide Meeting? How would this be done?
3. Physical space — the number of young Friends has grown at TCFM. Does our current physical space accommodate this wonderful energy? What are our short term and long term goals?

Weaving through consideration of these practical concerns are the queries “How does Spirit lead us?” and “What are the best structures to support the ministries at Twin Cities Friends Meeting?”

And as convenient and simple it may appear to consider these issues one by one, TCFM Friends are aware they all interrelate. At the January 8, 2006 MWB, one Friend spoke of the relationship of our community concerns being like an amoeba. In order to make movement as a community, realistically, we can only move one pseudopod forward at a time.

This was beautifully articulated in an article printed in the Second Month, 2006 TCFM Newsletter. The Personal Voices essay, “The Amoeba Analogy” was written by Richard Fuller, as presented at the January 8, 2006 MWB.

Personal Voices The Amoeba Analogy by Richard Fuller

It seems to me that in the year ahead TCFM should move into its new directions in a manner similar to the way an amoeba moves.

Amoebas are single-celled animals that are basically fluid inside a flexible skin. They move by pouring part of their fluid into some stretched area of skin and then flowing the rest of them in behind the first part and pulling up the extra skin that was where the fluid used to be. That fresh stretched area of skin they pour themselves into is called a “pseudopod” (fake foot).

As an amoeba begins to move in a new direction, it may send out a couple areas of early stretched skin and start flowing into both of them, even though there is not enough inner fluid to fill them both, and it is not capable of moving in both of the directions at once. Then, as its sense of direction develops, a choice is made for one pseudopod and the fluid is pulled back out other and its stretched skin is re-gathered.

I think TCFM will want to proceed in a similar fashion, further exploring the idea of part time help, while not making a final commitment to it at this point, but also extending ourselves in other directions which may turn out to be mutually incompatible in the end, such as setting off one or more bud meetings. I think it is only by putting ourselves into tentative motion that some people will say, “Oh my God! This will never do!” or “Oh yes! We should have done this years ago!” I think it is only by putting the community into motion in tentative directions that we can get the feedback we need to discern which way we really ought to go.

How is our amoeba moving?

DECISION AGENDA DOCUMENTS

CLERK’S REPORT — SIZE OF MEETING

This report summarizes TCFM’s process thus far with respect to the recent Jubilation questions of what size our Meeting should be. We come back to the last query considered in our 2005 year of discernment — “What are the best structures to support our ministries at TCFM?”

At January 8, 2006, MWB: Friends participated in worship sharing on the idea of hiring paid staff at TCFM, simply as a way to begin to address the Jubilation issues one by one, in manageable steps. In the midst of this, Friends wondered about the overall size of our Meeting and the special challenges and opportunities posed by having so many families with young children.

“Friends agreed that the committee clerks will discuss this concern at their meeting on 29th First Month and will bring further input to the business meeting. Friends are encouraged, as individuals and as small groups, to continue to discuss, gather information, pray, and otherwise actively play a role in helping the Meeting decide how to go forward.”

At the Committee Clerks meeting, 1/29/06, Committee clerks discussed both paid staff and size of Meeting, as requested by MWB. An initial “job duties” list for a potential paid staff was developed. Regarding size of Meeting, overall Friends noted that there were more advantages than disadvantages to having a large Meeting. Committee work is enhanced by having more Friends to draw from. First Day School is richer for having more people resources and organization. Listening to God is more important than size of Meeting. One disadvantage is that newcomers sometimes get lost in our large Meeting. Helping newcomers get settled in small worship circles and committee work helps them get grounded.”

At fourth month MWB, Friends participated in worship sharing regarding paid staff. However, the first few and several subsequent sharings centered more around size of Meeting, though that was not the stated focus. These sharings are summarized:

1. One Friend noted our seasoned elders and First Day School leaders, and that the risk of bud Meetings would be loss of diversity — of ages, spiritual approaches and sexual preferences.

2. Another Friend felt that it should be the small group who should ask to become a bud Meeting, not initiated as a large group.

3. As the oil empire grows, we will be relying on small community-based groups more and more — bud Meetings at a community level. The original vision (at TCFM) was a large and embracing home that could support and nurture small neighborhood groups — so perhaps there’s no incompatibility in having both. And traditional Quaker structures, such as a quarterly meeting could accommodate that.

4. Historically at TCFM the impetus for development for bud Meetngs came from individuals, not from the Meeting. When Prospect Hill started, it was around an issue — not wanting to own property. We may find if we move forward with paid staff that some individuals may choose not to move forward and may initiate a bud Meeting.

5. Forming buds should be a matter of individuals discerning God’s Will to do something different.

What is God’s will for TCFM? What are the structures that support the ministries at TCFM?

Marianne Clinton-McCausland

At the June 12, 2006 MWB, Friends participated in worship sharing around the topic of “Size of Meeting”.  The following was minuted:

Clerk’s report: Clerk Marianne Clinton-McCausland read a report summarizing our journey in response to our 2005 year of discernment query, “What are the best structures to support our ministries at TCFM?”  We picked up our exploration of the interrelated questions of hiring paid staff, facing our identity as a large meeting and how comfortable we feel in that identity and how to best address the needs of the many children amongst us.  We responded in worship sharing to this query: What is God’s will for TCFM?  What are the structures that support the ministries at TCFM?”

A deep and meaningful worship sharing featured a recognition of the joys of rich community available through our large meeting and a commitment to respond with creativity and strength to addressing head on the challenges of what changes we need to make to reduce the stress that comes with being a large meeting.

DECISION AGENDA DOCUMENTS

CLERK’S REPORT — SIZE OF MEETING

This report summarizes TCFM’s process thus far with respect to the recent Jubilation questions of what size our Meeting should be. We come back to the last query considered in our 2005 year of discernment — “What are the best structures to support our ministries at TCFM?”

At January 8, 2006, MWB: Friends participated in worship sharing on the idea of hiring paid staff at TCFM, simply as a way to begin to address the Jubilation issues one by one, in manageable steps. In the midst of this, Friends wondered about the overall size of our Meeting and the special challenges and opportunities posed by having so many families with young children.

“Friends agreed that the committee clerks will discuss this concern at their meeting on 29th First Month and will bring further input to the business meeting. Friends are encouraged, as individuals and as small groups, to continue to discuss, gather information, pray, and otherwise actively play a role in helping the Meeting decide how to go forward.”

At the Committee Clerks meeting, 1/29/06, Committee clerks discussed both paid staff and size of Meeting, as requested by MWB. An initial “job duties” list for a potential paid staff was developed. Regarding size of Meeting, overall Friends noted that there were more advantages than disadvantages to having a large Meeting. Committee work is enhanced by having more Friends to draw from. First Day School is richer for having more people resources and organization. Listening to God is more important than size of Meeting. One disadvantage is that newcomers sometimes get lost in our large Meeting. Helping newcomers get settled in small worship circles and committee work helps them get grounded.”

At fourth month MWB, Friends participated in worship sharing regarding paid staff. However, the first few and several subsequent sharings centered more around size of Meeting, though that was not the stated focus. These sharings are summarized:

1. One Friend noted our seasoned elders and First Day School leaders, and that the risk of bud Meetings would be loss of diversity — of ages, spiritual approaches and sexual preferences.

2. Another Friend felt that it should be the small group who should ask to become a bud Meeting, not initiated as a large group.

3. As the oil empire grows, we will be relying on small community-based groups more and more — bud Meetings at a community level. The original vision (at TCFM) was a large and embracing home that could support and nurture small neighborhood groups — so perhaps there’s no incompatibility in having both. And traditional Quaker structures, such as a quarterly meeting could accommodate that.

4. Historically at TCFM the impetus for development for bud Meetngs came from individuals, not from the Meeting. When Prospect Hill started, it was around an issue — not wanting to own property. We may find if we move forward with paid staff that some individuals may choose not to move forward and may initiate a bud Meeting.

5. Forming buds should be a matter of individuals discerning God’s Will to do something different.

What is God’s will for TCFM? What are the structures that support the ministries at TCFM?

Marianne Clinton-McCausland

At the June 12, 2006 MWB, Friends participated in worship sharing around the topic of “Size of Meeting”.  The following was minuted:

Clerk’s report: Clerk Marianne Clinton-McCausland read a report summarizing our journey in response to our 2005 year of discernment query, “What are the best structures to support our ministries at TCFM?”  We picked up our exploration of the interrelated questions of hiring paid staff, facing our identity as a large meeting and how comfortable we feel in that identity and how to best address the needs of the many children amongst us.  We responded in worship sharing to this query: What is God’s will for TCFM?  What are the structures that support the ministries at TCFM?”

A deep and meaningful worship sharing featured a recognition of the joys of rich community available through our large meeting and a commitment to respond with creativity and strength to addressing head on the challenges of what changes we need to make to reduce the stress that comes with being a large meeting.