United Church of God, an International Association

Council of Elders Quarterly Meeting Report

Milford, Ohio

Wednesday, December 9, 2015

Chairman Robin Webber called the morning session to order at 9:03 a.m., and the meeting was opened with prayer. Ten Council of Elders (Council) members were present. Mario Seiglie joined about 90 minutes later because of teaching an ABC class. Mark Mickelson was absent due to health issues.

Potential Purchase of a Local Congregation Facility—Rick Shabi

The Council went into planned executive session.

Role and Rules Committee Presentations—Rainer Salomaa

At 9:25 a.m. the Council came into open session and was led by Rainer Salomaa, chairman of the Roles and Rules Committee, to present papers for edits and input.

• “Process and Timeline for Selection of President”: This document was edited and will be presented for approval later in the meetings.
• “GCE and CoE Online Librarian—Scope and Responsibilities”: UCG’s online library for the GCE and CoE makes it easier to find documents, but there is a need to have a qualified elder keep the library up to date. A scope and responsibilities was reviewed, and a quorum of the Council unanimously approved it.
• “Resolution to Appoint Online Librarian”: It was discussed, and a quorum of the Council unanimously approved the resolution.
• It was then discussed to appoint Roc Corbett as the online librarian. It was unanimously approved by a quorum of the Council.
• Proposed Amendment to Bylaw 8.7.2(1): This proposed amendment harmonizes better with two other bylaws and helps to clarify the process for hiring and will be further clarified when policies and procedures in our HR manual are refined. John Elliott commented that it is important to have checks and balances and the importance for the Council to have involvement in this process. He felt that there is more to completing this entire process for better explanation. There were edits suggested and discussed. Don Ward would like to have more details up front and not after the fact. A quorum of nine approved this amendment (One “no” vote—John Elliott; one abstention—Don Ward; Mark Mickelson was absent due to health issue).
• Proposed Amendment to “Process for GCE submitting an agenda item”: Technical edits regarding bylaw references and the need for a title were discussed. This edited document is now ready to go as an agenda item to the GCE for their approval in May 2016.
• Proposed Amendment to “Process for GCE submitting an agenda item without a meeting”: There were technical edits regarding bylaw references and a need for a title. The edited document is now ready to go to the GCE for their approval in May 2016.
• “Guidelines and Process for Nominating and Electing Council Chairman and Deputy Chairman in Years When Regular Terms Expire”: Technical edits regarding bylaw references were proposed and discussed. It was unanimously approved by a quorum of the Council.
• Technical amendment to “Rules of Order for Special and annual meetings of the GCE of the UCG”: Technical edits regarding bylaw references were discussed. This document is now ready to go to the GCE for their approval in May 2016.
• A proposed Council Resolution drafted by Larry Darden to correct an unintentional presentation (or scrivener error in Article 5.1.1(4) of the Constitution), which was buried within a group of “clean-up” amendments to the Constitution in 2014: The Council discussed this issue and asked who submitted this error. It was explained that the Council submitted this based on a recommendation for adoption of multiple amendments proposed by the Governing Documents Review Team. The error was missed by all, but Larry Darden recently discovered it. The Council decided to look at it in more detail the next day.

The Council had lunch with the ABC students and then had an hour Q&A with the 22 ABC students. Bill Bradford wasn’t feeling well and missed the rest of the day.

President’s Discussion With Council—Victor Kubik

The Council went into scheduled executive session at 2 p.m.

Home Office Facilities—Victor Kubik and Peter Eddington [video done]

The Council came out of executive session at 3:15 p.m. Mr. Kubik led a presentation discussing the current home office facility and its immediate maintenance needs. Both the Council and the administration desired to have this in full open session. Mr. Kubik talked about the numerous activities that occur in the home office, which is used seven days a week.

The home office was built in 2001. After 14 years it naturally has needed maintenance, and there are areas that need updating. Of major importance are the air conditioning units, which have a 15-year life span. They will be expensive to replace.

Because of the age of the building, and in order to assure we know what needs to be addressed, there will be a building inspector hired to assess all the issues and give input.

Mr. Kubik then turned the meeting over to Peter Eddington, who presented an architectural plan that was prepared back in 2012. The plan calls for an 80-foot expansion of the current facility, further to the west. The area to be created by the expansion, which would effectively double the size of the building, includes the following:

• An expanded television studio. It was noted that the current home office was not designed with a video/television studio in mind. We would like a proper studio because the video production is an important element of what the Church does.
• Additional education and classroom facilities for ABC and training areas for new ministerial hires and general ministerial training.
• A 396-seat auditorium for church services.
• Expanded library space and work areas.
• A 110-seat dining area and expansion of the current kitchen facilities to include a walk-in freezer and commercial dishwasher.

It was noted that this plan was discussed in 2012 but put on hold for further discussion until the Church was in a better financial position.

The total cost of the expansion as discussed would be about $3 million to build.

After the plan was presented, there were questions and discussion.

John Elliott asked if there was any thought put into focusing on the building needs of the administration and staff but having the congregation find another facility to meet in.

Peter Eddington replied that the current home office was not intended to include the church, but it has allowed for that. It is nice to be able to offer it to the Cincinnati East congregation to use. Most church organizations have an area for worship at their headquarters.

Scott Ashley asked if there was a current building fund and how much was in it.

Rick Shabi replied that there is a restricted building fund on the books. It currently has about $25,000 in it, specifically designated for a television studio expansion.

Mario Seiglie, referring to John Elliott’s question, stated that the property already exists, and we don’t have to buy land for another church hall. He also stated that this proposal sounds much more attractive now that the Denton, Texas, property has been sold. He likes the plan, since the plans have already been paid for.

Mr. Eddington noted that while we have the plans, there would be construction plans that would have to be prepared and paid for if the project is to continue.

Some of the employees present for the presentation were asked for their input:

• Richard Kennebeck, speaking as office manager, said that we have held back on major updates or renovations for the past seven years. He noted that space for both secure storage and non-secure storage is running short, and there were some security upgrades that could be included if the building is expanded.
• Tim Sipes, facilities manager, commented that there is a need to update the building for the employees. An inspection of the facility would help highlight areas that need to be addressed. He commented on the air conditioning units, stating they are beginning to rust, resulting in leaks in the roof. Windows have been an issue, with the settling and shifting causing leaks in the rubber seals. Needed repairs have not been done. There are carpeting issues, painting that is needed, replacement of ceiling tiles, and the outside façade needs painting. He noted that one concern with the expansion plan as presented is that the parking area is already “maxed out” with combined services and cannot be expanded any further.
• Steve Myers, pastor of Cincinnati East, stated that there are challenges in the building with an average Sabbath attendance of 275. He would like to see the brethren to be included and asked for their input in the discussion about church facilities that are part of the present expansion plan.
• Stella Helterbrand, kitchen supervisor, commented that there are needed improvements to the kitchen area. It is a small kitchen, poorly designed and with limited space. The grease trap is too small to install a dishwasher. Her office is on the other side of the building, so it is not a convenient or ideal setup.
• Rudy Rangel, production supervisor, said there is a need for more room. Having an open work area is very appealing because of the space that can be saved. The extra space would help to increase video productions. As a local congregation member, he also liked the idea of a separate church building in the community.
• Jamie Schreiber, associate video producer, commented about the parking being a big issue when there are combined services, but he is excited about the video production studio for the media department.

Robin Webber commented that there may be options for auxiliary parking with nearby locations across the streets from the facility, so the current parking area wouldn’t necessarily be a limitation.

Tony Wasilkoff mentioned that the auditorium in the current plan would just be able to hold the combined services attendance. If the auditorium were to be built, he commented it might be good to have room to anticipate growth. Peter Eddington said that the current situation of a.m. and p.m services provides for a lot of future growth. If we go beyond that, then we would have to rent a hall for Holy Day services, as we do now. There is not room to expand the auditorium much beyond the proposed plan without taking valuable warehouse space.

Victor Kubik closed by mentioning that they weren’t trying to pressure anyone, but they just wanted to bring the facts about the current circumstances. The presenters asked the Council, “Where do we go from here?” They commented it would be nice to start a building fund and start talking about this to the membership.

Mr. Webber said the Council would discuss this further and thanked everyone for their work. He reiterated that nothing at this time is being decided. The administration was welcomed in the December meetings to offer a presentation. There is yet much to consider and more input to be sought from many quarters. More discussion will follow as we finalize strategic planning for 2016-2017 in the Council meetings slated for February 2016.

Legal Report—Larry Darden

Discussion Regarding Church Reserves—Robin Webber, Victor Kubik, Rick Shabi

At 5 p.m. the Council then went into scheduled executive session for the rest of the day to cover the legal report and to have a discussion regarding Church reserves.

The Council adjourned at 6:13 p.m.

Thursday, December 10, 2015

Chairman Robin Webber called the morning session to order at 9:07 a.m., and the meeting was opened with prayer. Ten Council of Elders (Council) members were present. Mario Seiglie joined about 90 minutes later because of teaching an ABC class. Mark Mickelson was absent due to health issue.

Chairman Webber shared basic comments that came from the previous day’s session on the Council’s review of the Church’s financial reserves. Our external auditor’s statement of good financial health was the basis of the discussion. We remain in strong standing. We do have a measure of reserves to see how they can best be used and not sit on them. There is nothing immediate, but we do want to responsively move forward as we think about it. Mr. Webber stated, “We always set aside eight-weeks of reserve, which is a mandated policy.” He continued by suggesting that we consider the challenging times we live in that could impact our flow of donations at any time. The general comments and ensuing discussion by the Council were to remain wise and prudent (not fearful!) in these times and strive to maintain an unofficial working level of 10-weeks reserves as a guiding bottom-line principle while maintaining our official eight-weeks policy. We want to put the tithes and donations of the brethren into action and to move the mission statement of the Church forward.

Bill Bradford made a separate comment that he thanked Scott Ashley and his team for the work that went into the January/February issue of the Beyond Today. He said it is really a great issue.

Mr. Bradford then commented on the principles of the Budget and reminded the administration to put all proposed programs and estimates into the Budget. He reminded the administration that the Budget should provide for sustaining new hires and that Rick Shabi would help to monitor the process as the Budget is prepared.

Mr. Webber reminded everyone of the importance of constant communication between the administration and the Council, especially before the February meetings. He mentioned how important it is to have our various committees interacting with the administration in preparation for matters to come to the full Council in February 2016.

Finalize Roles and Rules Committee Matters Brought Up During the Meetings—Rainer Salomaa

Rainer Salomaa, the chairman of the Roles and Rules Committee, led the discussion of the following items:

• “Process and Timeline for Selection of President”: It was reviewed, and a quorum of the Council unanimously approved it.
• Technical amendments to correct the bylaw reference numbers in a Council approved document, “Guidelines and Process for Nominating and Electing Council Chairman and Deputy Chairman in Years When Regular Terms Expire”: It was reviewed, and a quorum of the Council unanimously approved it.
• Resolution recommended by Larry Darden to correct an unintentional presentation (or scrivener error) with respect to Constitution Article 5.1.1(4): Mr. Darden explained that the group of amendments to the Constitution in 2014 were to be limited to making minor non-substantive wordsmithing type corrections. But Article 5.1.1(4), as adopted in 2014 within that group, allowed the entire Constitution to be revoked by three quarters “of those who ballot,” but was erroneously presented as if there was no change from the (then-current) 2005 version of the Constitution. The actual 2005 language stated that a revocation of the Constitution could occur based only on the approval of three quarters of the entire GCE (not just those who balloted). This presentation error amounted to an (unintended) substantive change in that article that should have been balloted upon as a stand-alone proposal (with a full “Statement of Justification,” etc.), not within a group of “clean-up” amendments. Gerald Seelig said this is the first time this has happened in our history. Mr. Salomaa said that with the ebb and flow of edits, it just slipped through and no one caught it. Mr. Darden said it was presented by the Council and should be corrected by the Council. The Council discussed another option (that of having the GCE ballot on the matter) and decided that since the error was based on a Council-approved presentation error within the Notice it authorized pursuant to the Bylaws (which the Council is to interpret) it was best corrected by the Council as suggested by Mr. Darden. The resolution brings Constitution Article 5.1.1(4) back to the original wording in the 2005 Constitution, keeping the 2014 numbering. The corrected version of the Constitution would be dated/referenced as “December 2015, corrected.” The resolution was reviewed, and a quorum of the Council unanimously approved it.

Finalize Doctrine Committee Matters—John Elliott

At 10:10 a.m. the Council went into planned executive session.

At 11:25 a.m. the Council came back into open session.

Mr. Webber wanted to insert general awareness of one item being reviewed by the Council at this time that was covered during executive session. In the August 2015 meetings the chairman remanded to the Doctrine Committee (DC) a study on voting and holding public office (mentioned in CoE report of Aug. 12-13, 2015). This was based on concerns expressed by some GCE members regarding certain conclusions drawn by our current 23-page CoE approved study paper. Responding to this assignment, the chairman of the DC, John Elliott, brought forward to the Council a preliminary review of this matter. The Council, as it did in August, believes this matter needs further review and clarification. The project remains remanded to the DC to bring forward further study and material for full CoE review in the February 2016 meetings.

Upcoming Meetings—Robin Webber

Chairman Webber went through the dates for the next face-to-face meetings. Feb. 29-March 3, 2016, were set for the Council meetings. It was encouraged for all committees to meet a couple of times beforehand and to be sure to engage the administration as needed at their level before the February Council meetings.

Victor Kubik then asked if the building fund could be discussed and if he could mention such a fund for media and training centers needs in his newsletter during this month.

Mr. Webber commented that with the Council’s review yesterday of the reserves there is no desire to move funds too quickly without meaningful time for thoughtful review, but creating a general multi-purpose building fund serving various spheres of the work of the Church might be amenable.

Rick Shabi commented that there is currently a building fund designation in the donation webpage. He further commented that the proposed building expansion was a big financial decision and commitment and had not yet been studied, researched, or otherwise evaluated to see if it was feasible.

In conclusion, Mr. Webber said the emphasis on a building fund should be more of a generic statement without leaning towards immediate future building, since that needs more research and discussion. It was emphasized to keep the statement generic until they know where those funds will be needed. There is the maintenance of the building that needs to be included, but there is no certainty of expanding the home office building at this time.

The Council then went into a planned executive session at 11:48 a.m.

The Council adjourned at 12:08 p.m.

-end-

Council Reporter

Shawn Cortelyou

© 2015 United Church of God, an International Association