Vision 04

Presiding: Bob A, Jo H

1. Revisiting Our Vision Statement
Bob presented a handout of the current version of our Vision Statement:

UUAHP seeks to bring UUs together to collectively put our UU principles into practice to alleviate the affordable housing crisis in our metropolitan region by:
* Organizing support for public policy initiatives of our partners in the affordable housing advocacy community
* Participating in direct service projects, such as Habitat for Humanity, that have a direct impact on those needing affordable housing
* Strategically funding affordable housing projects that serve individuals at 30% or less than the median metropolitan household income, meet a need that might not otherwise be served, and best exemplify UU principals in action.
UUAHP seeks to make UUs a much more visible force for social justice in our metropolitan community.

The group was comfortable with this statement, so it will continue to be our Vision Statement.

Review and assessment of each UUAHP program area:

Systemic change includes working with three larger coalitions as our key partners:
* Metropolitan Interfaith Council on Affordable Housing (MICAH) ("Yes in My Back Yard - Regional Equity and Responsibility" campaign (YIMBY), organizing and advocating for affordable housing in local communities throughout the metro area)
* Minnesota Housing Partnership (MHP) (We support and promote MHP's Day on the Hill events as well as organizing and advocacy for housing policy change at the State level)
* Alliance for Metropolitan Stability (AMS)(regional issues, including affordable housing policy).

Service includes working with Habitat for Humanity and Congregations Building Community in the Heritage Park development.

Funding includes working to raise and strategically distribute money contributed by UUs and UU congregations. Distributions to date include the following investments:
* Corporation for Supportive Housing (CSH): $65,000
* Neighbor to Neighbor: $10,000
* Person to Person: $10,000
* Habitat for Humanity: $40,000 - $50,000 (includes $30,000 from FUS for Congregations Building Community)

Future scenarios - Ideas for Ongoing Work

Systemic change
* Lobbying locally, regionally, statewide for affordable housing
* All agreed that we should continue with social policy work
* Ongoing volunteer responsibilities and programs:
o MHP: Mary Wilson will look into attending the Housing Minnesota meetings
o MICAH: Carol Lawson will work on YIMBY campaign, siting issues
* Presentations at each UU congregation
* Local UUAHP members to inform neighbors
* Back office workers
o AMS: Bob Aderhold will continue to be our representative to the AMS membership meetings.
* Summary:
o We will continue the systemic change work
o Continue to work with our current three partners
o We need to plug local people into local issues
o We need a strategy for keeping in touch with each of our partners and communicating back to UUAHP

Service
* Explore more direct hands on work with individuals
* Explore The Third Way program
* Continue to work with Habitat for Humanity
* Explore a link with Opportunity Investment Housing Fund (OIHF), through Unity Church Universalist
* Points to consider:
o How can/should we focus and not spread ourselves too thin
o Could we use Service as a leadership training opportunity
o We need to monitor H4H for overcapacity
o We need to provide alternate means of service besides H4H
* Service may be a very local idea: each congregation could choose as appropriate. This may not help build UUAHP, but local congregations could identify opportunities and bring them to UUAHP for broader appeal.
* Problems:
o People may do only service without the connection to advocacy. Someone who has built houses can be a good advocate for housing.
o Getting people to give even a little time is difficult in these busy times. Can we provide smaller tasks?
o Service needs to be local. What is UUAHP doing in, e.g., White Bear Lake? Could/should we create demand for affordable housing in a specific community?
* Summary:
o We have a good opportunity with Habitat for Humanity
o We should expand into other service that may be more local
o We need research into a new area, such as
* Tutoring
* Person to Person or Neighbor to Neighbor
* Mentoring individuals and families

Funding
Carol White reported on the Corporation for Supportive Housing (CSH). To date, we have funded three housing projects with a total of $45,000 out of $65,000 granted to CSH. The projects are:
* Central Avenue Apartments: 61 Units for single adults. UU repayment estimated 2005.
* Oasis of Love: 6 units for families. UU repayment estimated end of 2004
* Oak Park Homes/NE House: 24 units for families. UU repayment estimated mid-2005

CSH has had significant funding recently, including $1 million from Wells Fargo.
Carol has a very positive view of CSH leadership, but recommends not putting more money into CSH for the foreseeable future.

CSH Issues:
* African American leadership development - CSH is seeking leadership among supportive housing sponsors
* Opposition to supportive housing among mental health workers at state and county levels because supportive housing can look like an institutional setting, i.e., a return to institutionalization.

We can use the success of CSH in our YIMBY presentations.

UUAHP Funding Issues
* UUAHP focus remains on those at 30% MMI
* We need to keep this in front of our congregations
* What to do with CSH money returned in 2004 - 2005
* Can we support "green" housing efforts
* Is there a connection to MUUSJA funding statewide for social justice?
* We need a working group on funding to make recommendations to UUAHP for the 2004-2005 program year.
* What is UUAHP's position on Gov. Pawlenty's $20 MM bonding proposal?
o UUAHP wishes to take a "Yes, but…." position regarding the bonding issue. How can we reconcile money for bricks and mortar with the need for all other affordable housing needs?

Relations between UUAHP and MUUSJA

Betsy Allis presented a handout containing an overview of the Metropolitan UU Social Justice Alliance (MUUSJA) history and programs through January 2004. Items from the ensuing discussion included:
* Are we one group or two?
* MUUSJA does not have local name recognition. It needs:
o More congregational publicity
o Use of email lists? Sermons?
* MUUSJA might be a regular agenda item for UUAHP
* MUUSJA does not seem to have a cause yet, whereas UUAHP does. MUUSJA does address other social justice issues that UUs are interested in. UUAHP should be associated with, but independent from, MUUSJA.
* A fundamental issue is: who are we (UUAHP)? MUUSJA seems to have taken over UUAHP. MUUSJA issues are too broad; in UUAHP, we have been able to get UUs to agree on one social justice issue to work on. Global issues can be divisive and distracting.
* UUAHP can be effective without being part of MUUSJA. There is no conflict between the two mission statements. UUAHP should not be limited or constrained by MUUSJA.
* There is no evidence of any limitations put on UUAHP by the current relationship with MUUSJA.
* MUUSJA presents a structure that should empower UUAHP.
* At a grander level, the UUA does have an emphasis on globalization.
* MUUSJA provides a place for UUs who are not interested in affordable housing.
* People like to focus on a specific community need that we can mobilize congregations around.
* The size of MUUSJA can be of value for staffing and infrastructure needs of UUAHP. Some aspects of social justice are common across all areas, such as staffing and training.
* How can we define and separate fund raising for the two organizations? We must not co-mingle funds. Making mistakes or having problems with the money is the surest way to destroy UUAHP. Someone in UUAHP must be responsible for the funds in the FUS Restricted Fund account.
* MUUSJA currently supports the work of UUAHP for affordable housing continually, on a metro-wide basis.
* Currently, there is no coordination of programs, efforts, etc., and this should be taking place.
* Communications from MUUSJA to UUAHP have been inadequate.
* Coordination of communications from the two organizations to congregations is important.

We agreed that we need to figure out how to make the relationship work. What governance or organization will be mutually beneficial?
In light of an apparent inability to agree on a course of action, we agreed that everyone should send ideas and concerns and suggestions to Kay Dawson by email (kaydawson@hearthcommunities.com) with a view toward establishing a game plan or proposal that can be used as a basis for resolution of opposing views. Kay will assemble and distill the comments. All comments should be sent to Kay in time for her to compile them prior to the March 4, 2004 UUAHP steering committee meeting.

The group adjourned with many thanks to Kay for hosting the meeting and to all for food contributions and for stimulating and thoughtful discussions.

Ron Dueltgen

Home

Bulletin Board

Contact Webmaster