Fix the UUA? With reforms?

Chalice Chick has opened up a discussion about "fixing the UUA."  There have been several ideas, several of which might be embraced by enough folks to make it a serious proposal.

For example, what about moving the UUA HQ out of Boston!  Enough congregations might support a business resolution to move and  it would be an interesting debate at General Assembly.  If we sold the quaint and crowded headquarters buildings in Boston and bought real estate in a less expensive city, we could get nice offices and a real hotel for those who travel from out of town to do business with the Association, and increase the endowment at the same time.  I doubt it would make much difference in the UUA culture however,  there are few if any Bostonians working in professional positions at the UUA HQ.  The notion that Brahmins control the HQ is an urban myth, and won't die even after we get to Missouri.  (Please pick an air hub with cheap housing, and good medical care, so the salaries can cover living expenses. A Canadian city with a warm climate sounds ideal.)  But on a related proposal,  I will vote against any reduction of staff, unless some one can find a way to do the work that they do.  Those who argue that staff doesn't work hard have no idea how hard they work.

Some have observed that we pass a lot of resolutions of immediate concern.  It is hard to remember them all.  But even if we increased the super majority required to pass such resolutions, most of the resolutions would still pass since the sentiments contained in the resolves enjoy the support of most UUs.  Conservative UUs refuse to acknowledge how liberal their co-religionists really are, and how much they enjoy making statements witnessing their liberalism. On the other hand,  asking the drafting committee of new resolution to make it sound more religious is a great idea, but isn't that going to get a reaction from the folks that objected to the suggestion that we be more open to the religious language?

Philocrites asks how does one make change in the UUA?  He suggests a Guide Book for the new change agent.  I have seen change in the UUA over the years, in fact I am a habitual UUA reformer.  Since I was a youth, I have joined with others to affect some change by organizing grass roots efforts in support a reform, in the form of a business resolution, or amendment to the by-laws.  But with all my efforts, more change has come from Presidents who run on reform platforms and who actually implement some of their ideas in programmatic and structural change.  Much of Bill Sinkford's original platform is still waiting for the capital funds and free time to turn them into programs and proposals.  His idea of decentralizing the UUA out of Boston and creating centers of excellence at Meadville and Starr King for developing programs remains a good idea, whose time has come again and again.  So the most effective way to get an idea out there, and get it debated, is run for President.  But Presidents seem less energetic about reform after they have been elected, especially in the second term.

I have seen change, and I have seen reform.  But with all the changes and reforms, I don't think that the UUA has been fixed.  Perhaps Roger Kuhrt has identified the problem.  He calls it hypercorporatism.  The UUA HQ doesn't function as the administrative and program offices of an Association of Congregations, it functions as a denominational headquarters separate and apart from the community of congregations.  And the corporation gets enamored with its identity and generates programs to promote itself.  The congregations have become consumers of services, rather than partners of each other.  Our little reforms do little to change such a culture.  We can't "fix" headquarters without a different way of relating each congregation to each other congregation.  And running for President won't change the inter relationship of congregations,  it can just reshuffle the staff, move the staff West, and change the priorities of the corporation.