Minutes of Meeting for Business, August 8, 2021
Minneapolis Friends Meeting
Minutes of Monthly Meeting for Business
August 8, 2021
Conducted remotely via Zoom
[Names and some content modified for posting on the web]
In Attendance: John K. – presiding clerk, Tom W. – recording clerk, Steve S. – Zoom host, plus 49 attenders
- Opening Silent Worship
- Approve Agenda – APPROVED
- Approve July Minutes – APPROVED
- Return to In-Person Meetings – Presiding Clerk opened the discussion with a review of the process Meeting has followed, leading to today’s request for action; and he reminded us that this is not about our personal choices, specifically, but more about seeking the way for our community to be comfortable in its decision on how and when to re-open the meeting house.
- First Item – Mayim Rabim’s request to meet in person Mayim Rabim is seeking to conduct their services in-person at the meeting house. Linda C. reports that Mayim Rabim has shared their re-opening protocols with the Trustees and they are very similar to our own. Friends APPROVED Mayim Rabim’s request to begin meeting in-person. Linda will inform Mayim Rabim of our decision.
- Second Item – We move forward with further implementation of the initial capability to support hybrid meetings. Discussion: There was some concern about the meaning of this – does this mean proceeding with purchasing of equipment? Yes. Friends APPROVED the request. There was concern that no dollar amount was included in the proposal. Clerk said Meeting had previously reviewed and approved a budget estimate of $31K for equipment purchases to support the hybrid meeting. A more recent estimate is lower than that, but given the earlier approval of $31K, Clerk recommended staying with the higher amount, but including it in the proposal and having it re-approved. Meeting APPROVED that we move forward with further implementation of the initial capability to support hybrid meetings with a budget of up to $31,000.
- Third Item – we establish a designated fund to allow folks to donate specifically to the technology upgrades. Clerk asked if it made the most sense to use the Building Fund for this purpose, so we do not have to establish a new stand-alone fund. A Trustee agreed. If an individual wants to donate to this, specifically, they can make out a donation to Minneapolis Friends Meeting and designate it to the Building Fund in support of the audio/video system. This does not require Meeting approval.
- Fourth item – We designate an ongoing “Technology Committee” or group of individuals whose charge is to maintain the technology and operate the technology and Zoom meetings during the hybrid meetings. (Optionally, we could hire someone to operate the technology and host the Zoom meetings every First Day and other special occasions.) Clerk recommends withdrawing, for now, the option to hire someone. This committee would become part of the regular nominating process. Discussion: Is there, still, the possibility to hire someone? Yes, but that is something for future discussion … Can the committee make recommendations regarding hiring someone, if they deem it appropriate? There was concern about wear and tear on the Zoom host as witnessed today when the host requested someone else take over the duties so they could participate fully in the discussion. We want members to be able to participate in Meeting and not to feel relegated to operating the digital system … Would the committee be responsible to the Meeting as a whole? Yes … Maintaining the physical equipment over time requires more technical expertise and challenge than running a Zoom meeting. Are there two separate questions? Clerk – yes. That is how he sees it. Both areas would be under the charge of the Technology Committee, but there is a technology side and an operations side … There was considerable discussion on this point: hiring out a position would reduce wear and tear on the Meeting. We do need a committee, but there has to be a better way to communicate to the Meeting how to make it work (there was a problem with the Zoom meeting code issued for this morning’s service that kept the host tied up for a long time). Swapping people in and out of the hosting role could be a problem. Are there people in the Meeting who are interested in doing this, besides Terry and Roger? What about Mayim Rabim? All this would be part of the process of constituting the new committee. Hiring someone would take the pressure off, but offering one’s service to Meeting can be viewed as a form of ministry and not something to be reimbursed. There is a larger pool of people who could successfully host on Zoom than those who would have technical expertise to oversee and maintain the equipment. The way the system is set up there will be presets established so it would be easier to operate on a weekly basis. Friend expressed concern that the charge to the Technology Committee is not clear. They suggested that the first task of the committee would be to create a charter of their responsibilities and then bring it back to the Meeting … Clerk said he is re-thinking this proposal and would like the ad-hoc committee to review the proposal for a Technology Committee and to bring back to Meeting more specific ideas about the committee’s responsibilities. Friends were comfortable Tabling this item.
- Fifth Item – As soon as the initial hybrid capability is ready, we begin to hold worship at the meeting house. Discussion: Friend is concerned that with the recent surge in COVID-19 cases, we might be forcing some people to be present in the meeting house to operate the equipment – putting them at enhanced risk. Clerk reassured us that we will stop and adjust to changes, as needed, as the pandemic continues to unfold … How long will the process of installing the technology take? Roger – it could take 6 weeks to get things rolling. There are issues with both procuring the necessary equipment and with getting it all set up … Clerk – we did approve that we would not go forward unless the capability was in place, so it will probably be 6 weeks to 2 months. Should we get going on this? All attendees will have to follow the protocols that we have put in place about using the building … Are the protocols subject to change as needed? Yes … There is adequate time to get things done with the ad hoc committee in the 6-8 weeks it will take to get the system set up … Friend expressed they still have significant reservations about opening up for in-person worship, and they would like us to delay a month or so until all the technology is set up and we have more time to see what the impact of the Delta variant will be. They feel this is the safer way to proceed and they do not want to approve moving forward at this time. Clerk tabled the proposal to move back to in-person meeting for worship.
- Sixth Item – We designate and empower a “committee” to monitor and adjust the building use protocol as more is learned and the environment changes. This group could include representatives from Trustees, Liaison and Review, the Meeting Coordinator, Ministry and Counsel, the Meeting Clerk. Discussion: The ad hoc committee had suggested that Linda C. (Trustee), Jeannette R. (Liaison and Review), and Carolyn V. (Meeting Coordinator) form the nucleus of a group that could review protocols and make decisions regarding COVID-19 when prompt action might be required. Bill H., Clerk of Ministry and Counsel, had also been included in some of their deliberations. Bill was not wanting another committee, as such; and felt the Trustees could do a good job. Jeannette suggested it would be good to have a committee or a minute authorizing independent action so they would not have to come to monthly meeting for every change to protocols or to address a pressing COVID related issue. Membership in ad-hoc committee is open and its accountability is not the same as the legal standing of the Trustees. There was support to have the Trustees take the lead on this. Clerk suggested a rewording of the Minute. Friends APPROVED the following: We empower Trustees to establish a committee to monitor and adjust the building use protocols as more is learned and the environment changes.
- Final Item – Empowering Property Committee to hire a heating/cooling contractor to review our systems to optimize air exchange. No action was needed by monthly meeting since Property Committee is already looking into this.
- Clerk listed all the actions monthly meeting had just considered, approved or tabled.
- Nominating Committee Update – Carolyn V. Debbie J. has agreed to be Clerk of Peace and Social Concerns Committee. John C. has agreed to serve on Ministry and Counsel for 3 years, until 2024. Friends APPROVED the nominations.
- Committee Reports:
- Shepherd Scholarship Annual Report – Allen G. [see Attachments for full report] The scholarship began in 1977 following a substantial gift from Roland and Zephyra Shepherd. Scholarship grants are made to qualified individuals who are members or children of members of Quaker meetings of five year standing. Under terms of the Trust Agreement that created the Scholarship Fund, disbursements for scholarship grants are made from interest only and assets have never been sold to fund a scholarship. Previously, the funds were held in CDs, with scholarships disbursed from the interest that had been earned; but with the dramatic decrease in performance of CDs, the Shepherd Scholarship Committee decided to invest the Net Portfolio Assets with Stifel Nicolaus Investments in bond funds and corporate stocks. This has led to greater fluctuations in market value in the past several years but is producing a more consistent income to fund scholarship grants. As of June 2021 the value of the Capital Assets was $240,000. In 2020, $5,000 was granted to two recipients and in 2021, $8,000 will be granted to two recipients. The 2021 grants will be paid out, probably in September, once the $8,000 cash equivalence for 2021 becomes available. Since its inception, grants made from the scholarship fund have totaled $225,414. Presiding Clerk – the Shepherd Scholarship is a legal trust, separate from Minneapolis Friends Meeting, and the annual report does not require Meeting approval.
- Correspondence – request for transfer of membership A letter requesting the transfer of membership for Leslie M. has been received from Boulder Monthly Meeting. Leslie has moved to Winona where she is attending Winona Preparatory Meeting, which is under the care of Minneapolis Friends Meeting. The letter was read. Leslie has been very active in Boulder Friends before, and after, joining Boulder Friends in September 2017. The letter mentioned her vigorous participation in meeting activities, her many contributions to the social fabric of Boulder Friends, her involvement on the Service Committee, and her initiation of a Caregivers support group during the pandemic. Clerk requested that Leslie M.’s transfer of membership be recorded in our Minutes and that the letter from Boulder Monthly Meeting be forwarded to Winona Meeting by our meeting coordinator.
- Clerk expressed his thanks for everyone’s patience in working through the many challenges Meeting has faced during COVID-19 and during the process of creating a safe hybrid meeting capability to re-open the meeting house. We have gotten over many hurdles. Friend expressed their gratitude for everything that John K., Bill H. and Carolyn V. have done during the challenges of the pandemic.
- Closing Worship
ATTACHMENTS:
Shepherd Scholarship Committee
Annual Report
July 1, 2021
History of Shepherd Scholarship
In 1977 Minneapolis Friends Meeting created a legal Trust, and named it the Roland and Zephyra Shepherd Scholarship Fund, following a significant gift of corporation stock from the Shepherds to fund the trust. The Trust makes annual scholarship grants to qualified individuals to pursue degrees at post-secondary educational institutions. Scholarships are available to members and children of members of Quaker meetings of five years standing, with a preference for individuals directly associated with Minneapolis Friends Meeting.
Current Policy of Shepherd Scholarship
Corpus, is the Net Portfolio Assets, currently invested with Stifel in bond funds and corporate stocks. These assets have fluctuated in value in the past several years, and are clearly indicated in each monthly statement issued to the Trust. Since its inception in 1977, Shepherd Scholarship Trustees have met their fiduciary responsibility by never selling an asset to fund a scholarship.
Cash equivalent is the income generated by the Net Portfolio Assets (investments) and may be available for each year for scholarship awards.
The Trustees lean toward conservative use of cash equivalent, weighing the option to reinvest some of the cash equivalent to enlarge the asset value of the Fund.
The Trustees have adopted a policy that Cash equivalent available for scholarships will be determined annually, often on or about March 31 each year, coinciding with the fiscal year of the Minneapolis Friends Meeting.
History of Current Capital Assets, Illustrating Fluctuations in Value over Time
Stifel Nicolaus Investment account 6/30/17 $ 209,676.84
Stifel Nicolaus Investment account 6/30/18 $ 181,053.95
Stifel Nicolaus Investment account 6/30/19 $ 184,621.53
Stifel Nicolaus Investment account 6/30/20 $ 200,102.23
Stifel Nicolaus Investment account 6/30/21 $ 240,231.69
(Prior to the Trustees adoption of the above definition of Corpus, the Trustees followed a concept of Minimum Principal Amount, set this Amount in the Trust at $187,600.00, and the “face values” of the investments are in excess of this amount)
Under the terms of the Trust Agreement creating the Scholarship Fund, disbursements for scholarship grants are made from interest only.
Grant History
Because of COVID-19, the regular pattern for distributing grants on an annual basis was interrupted, with no grants being initially distributed in 2020. As a result of this interruption, and the fluctuating value in the corpus of the fund, a distribution for 2020 in the amount of $5,000 to two recipients was accomplished earlier in 2021, and a second distribution of $8,000 to two recipients will be made later in 2021, probably September, 2021.
Grants made from the fund to date: $225,414.25 (when the distribution in September, 2021 occurs).
Original Trustees: Alfred V., Joe W., John P.
Current Trustees:
The current Trustees are Allen G., Clerk, Linda C., Betsy S., Ann M., Tom W., and John K., Clerk of Monthly Meeting, ex officio.
Signed: Allen G., Clerk