R.I.P. UUA Independent Affiliates

By vote of the UUA board, the status of Independent Affiliate will no longer exist beyond June 2010.  There is, however, a Related Organizations category under which many of the former Independent Affiliates will continue to have a relationship with the UUA.  Here is the breakdown of the categories and organizations:

Professional Organizations/Ministry

Interim Ministers Guild

Association of UU Administrators

The Council on Church Staff Finances

Liberal Religious Educators’ Association

The Society for Community Ministries

Unitarian Universalist Ministers’ Association

Unitarian Universalist Musicians Network 

UU Retired Ministers and Partners Association 

Theological Schools

Meadville Lombard Theological School

Starr King School for the Ministry

Supporting Organizations

Liberal Religious Charitable Society

Society for Ministerial Relief

UU Service Pension Society


International Association for Religious Freedom: US Chapter

International Association for Religious Freedom

International Convocation of UU Women

International Council of Unitarians and Universalists

Project Harvest Hope

Religions for Peace

Religions for Peace: USA

Unitarian Universalist Global AIDS Coalition

Unitarian Universalists for Justice in the Middle East

Unitarian Universalist Partner Church Council



Covenant of Unitarian Universalist Pagans

HUUmanists Association

The Magi Network

Unitarian Universalist Buddhist Fellowship

Unitarian Universalist Christian Fellowship

Unitarian Universalists for Jewish Awareness

Unitarian Universalist Mystics in Community

Unitarian Universalist Process Theology Network

Unitarian Universalist Psi Symposium


Allies for Racial Equality

Diverse & Revolutionary UU Multicultural Ministries

Equual Access


Lambda Ministers Guild

Latina/o UU Networking Association

Transgender Unitarian Universalist Religious Professionals

UUs for Polyamory Awareness

Social Justice

Center for Ethical Living and Social Justice Renewal/New Orleans Rebirth Volunteer Center

Conservative Forum for Unitarian Universalists

Economic Justice Action Group

Faithful Fools Street Ministry

Open Door Housing Fund/UU Interfaith Fund

Promise the Children

Unitarian Universalists for Alternatives to the Death Penalty

UU Housing Assistance Corporation

Unitarian Universalists for Drug Policy Reform

Unitarian Universalists for the Ethical Treatment of Animals

Unitarian Universalists for a Just Economic Community

Unitarian Universalist Ministry for Earth

UU Network on Indigenous Affairs

UU Peace Ministry

Unitarian Universalist Peace Fellowship


Unitarian Universalist State Advocacy Network

Unitarian Universalist Urban Ministry

UUs for Social Justice

UUs for Verified Voting

Urban Disciples

Universalist Conventions

The New Massachusetts Universalist Convention

New York State Convention of Universalists

The Pennsylvania Universalist Convention

Universalist Convocations

Camps, Conference Centers, Retirement Homes

Bethany Union for Young Women

Council of UU Camps and Conferences



Congregational Life

Channing-Murray Foundation

District Presidents’ Association

Southwest Unitarian Universalist Women

The Unitarian Universalist Men’s Network

Unitarian Universalist Women and Religion

Lifespan Faith Development

Continental UU Young Adult Network

Unitarian Universalist Religious Education History

Unitarian Sunday School Society

Unitarian Universalist Small Group Ministry Network


Partners in Unitarian Universalist History and Heritage

UU Women’s Heritage Society

Universalist Heritage Foundation

Unitarian Universalist Historical Society



Filed under Unitarian-Universalism

6 responses to “R.I.P. UUA Independent Affiliates

  1. Technically, the board hasn’t voted to eliminate the status, since independent affiliates are defined in the bylaws. The board has simply voted to stop granting or renewing that status. The General Assembly would have to amend the bylaws to eliminate the possibility of future independent affiliate organizations altogether.

  2. Is there an online record of this vote, and if not, what is your source?

    • Transient and Permanent

      This is just a reminder of old news, since the end of IA status is now almost upon us. The actual vote was last year, and can be found in the minutes for the January 17-19, 2009 board meeting. Jose Ballester went on record as opposing the motion, which implies (but doesn’t confirm) that he was the only nay vote. Kay Montgomery (executive vice president) sent around a letter this month to the heads of the soon-to-be-former IAs that contained the new language about “Related Organizations” (it’s also being used on the revamped uua.org now).

      • Bob Ertman

        I’d really like to see Kay Montgomery’s letter about “related organizations” to see what it might mean to the earlier former independent affiliates. Anybody?

  3. Dick Burkhart

    Although the UUA does have the authority to not grant or not renew an affiliate, it does not have arbitrary authority to do so. According to Section C-3.8.1 the Board may only “terminate such status upon finding that the organization no longer meets the foregoing qualifications or is not in compliance with the rules relating to such organizations”. The “foregoing” refers to “organizations whose purposes and intentions it [the Board] finds to be in sympathy with the principles of the Association”.

    Of course, technically the Board could adopt rules that make it effectively impossible for any affiliate to qualify. However this would be a serious breach of the intent of the Bylaws, hence of the General Assembly.

    I conclude that the UUA Board is in fact operating in violation of its own Bylaws. Bylaws, both the letter and the spirit, must govern the operations of the Association until changes are fully debated and approved by the General Assembly.

    I also need to note that rule 3.8.1(j) , which focuses on a requirement for congregational engagement and collaboration, is out of character with the other rules. It would seem that most affiliates would easily qualify, yet this rule has apparently been used to exclude them. Something like this should be debated by the GA and if approved included in the main Bylaw C-3.8.1, with only clear and reasonable rules related to it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s