[Access] notes from the Co-ordinating council meeting

[mary otten]

i agree with cindy's comments below. and _social justice doesn't just mean in the wider world, although that is certainly a large part. what  about anti-racism multi-cultural work within congregations? or welcoming congregation and the welcoming of all people, no matter whether they are gay bi- trans- or straight? indeed, i would argue that walking the talk at home, so to speak, is a huge part of credibility in the wider community. int case, accessibility within the church community is most definitely a part of social justice. but you're both right. thesetfors are going to be discussed more, especially ministerial. 
mary
but
----- source message -----
from: Lucinda Pitcairn <lucindap at comcast.net>
to: Accessibility group <access at uueugene.org>
date: 2008/01/13 01:29:37
subject: Re: [Access] notes from the Co-ordinating council meeting

>
>
> David Gilmartin wrote: 
> CLUSTER DISCUSSION: In our work planning, at our last meeting, for  
> this year and next, it seemed to me that our goals had to do with  
> accessibility and welcomingness within the church building and  
> congregational life. 
> This may be true for the coming months, but our goals, as outlined in our committee proposal, go beyond that, to some degree. Secondly, I did not come away with the impression from our last meeting that we had done all the work planning for this year or next.
> 
> As far as the cluster descriptions go (from  
> January 12 agenda), I think this may be a better fit with  
> "Ministerial" than "Social Justice."
> I think we need better definitions of these two terms, something that will no doubt be deliberated upon by the clusters task force.
> 
>  Social Justice, to me, carries the implication of doing something in and for the wider world. 
> It does to me, too, but one could argue that making our church more accessible in both the literal and figurative sense is also practicing social justice. 
> 
> Cindy
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 12, 2008, at 12:39 PM, Mary Otten wrotecci attended that meeting this morning, as did Mariah.   There is definite interest in our check-list, including some specific numbers
> that will ensure that power wheel-chairs can be accommodated. It was
> mentioned that having somebody who uses a wheel-chair go on site  
> visits
> is a good idea, but there are ADA numbers as well, so I think it would
> be good to get specific on the check list and include such numbers,
> e.g. as pertains to bath-room access and meeting set up, aisles, row
> spacing etc.  Sue Craig mentioned her concern specificaly with regard
> to the upcoming service auction. she wants to make sure that they set
> things up so that folks who use power chairs will be able to move
> around. Since I doubt the check list will be finalized by the time of
> the auction, it might be a nice idea if Cindy and Sue could get
> together via e-mail or telephone or whatever to discuss that aspect of
> things specifically as they relate to this event.  There is also
> interest in having our check-list put together with Candee-s list  
> about
> how to get child care, since lack of child care is also an
> accessibility barrier, albeit of a different sort than what we deal
> with directly.
> 
> At the meeting, there was discussion about the committee clusters  
> idea,
> and there was talk of putting us into the social justice cluster.
> further work is going to be done on this whole topic; a
> subcommitteedd/task force has been formed to do that work.  I can't
> recall who volunteered for it, but I know Ken and Mariah are on this
> list, and I'm sure one or both of them will be able to fill in. So if
> anyone has definite ideas about this topic, contact one of the members
> of that subcommittee and make your wishes known. I know one of the
> folks is Sarah Hendrickson.
> 
> We also talked about the issue of when its preferable to hold a  
> meeting
> at church and when off site is ok, and I made the points that we
> discussed at our last meeting, emphasizing that we were not trying to
> dump guilt trips on people, but that we did expect that meetings where
> anybody might be expected to come should be held at church, and that
> off site locations of such meetings should be chosen with  
> accessibility
> in mind. and there was some discussion as to just what that meant. I
> hope I got the idea across that the bottom line is that, a: we
> recognize that its not always going to be possible to hold all open
> meetings at church; b: its not always going to be possible to have off
> site locations be 100% comfortably accessible; but c: it is essential
> that we try to make that happen, and that people know that the best
> effort was made to make it so. Its a lot easier to take "no" for an
> answer if you really feel like best efforts were expended.
> 
> If Ken or Mariah want to add anythingh to my summary of acces-related
> CC topics, please feel free to speak up.
> 
> mary
>   
> _______________________________________________
> Access mailing list
> Access at uueugene.org
> http://www.uueugene.org
> http://www.uueugene.org/mailman/listinfo/access
> 
> 
>   
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Access mailing list
> Access at uueugene.org
> http://www.uueugene.org
> http://www.uueugene.org/mailman/listinfo/access