ICE warehouse??? NO THANK YOU

 

Posted without further comment

Did the President at LEAST have his own interpreter at the summit in Alaska?

RantWoman has not even tried to interact meaningfully with the August 15 summit involving one clear dictator and one leader trying to head in that direction.

Notable moments:

--An ABC news reporter asked Pres Putin whether he had any plans to stop killing civilians.

--Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov brought a red cap emblazoned with CCCP, the old Russian acronym for the Soviet Union.

--A good deal of internet clatter about red carpets, body language, war crimes, and territory.

--The summit ended early, as in the palaver broke up without even people trying to have the planned lunch together.

Now at least on X, attention has turned to what Zelenskyy (and European leaders should wear for the next meeting. RantWoman's opinion: should the European leaders try to match Zelenskyy or just show up en masse in whatever they usually wear?

RantWoman has been saying for a while that if a certain President wants to end the killing, he can just stop feeding people to the meat grinder and order everyone to GO HOME. Even RantWoman is not glib enough, though, to avoid weighing scenarios like the following,which makes almost no mention of new dimensions of warfare brought about by proliferation everywhere on all sides of drone technology.

Russian Collapse Imminent? The Rest of the World Should be Terrified

Thought crime: Arrests at Westminster Quaker Meeting House for planning resistance????

HOLY SHIT. 

Is there some kind of global epidemic of police doing high drama smash and grabs????

Some other news links "on the other side" as some media voices are wont to say.

First some background.

RantWoman has a new fave Quaker Channel., Quaker It Up.

"It's in British" to quote a weighty friend decades ago.

RantWoman has not yet dipped her toes into BlueSky partly because RantWoman spends a certain amount of online time defending principles such as freedom of religion and religious pluralism in a certain billionaire's electronic sandbox.

In any case, the news as it's understood tonight.

RantWoman is intrigued by a video that makes a lot of points in Quakerese and says NOTHING about why police raided a Quaker meetinghouse.

Links, in order of what RantWoman considers most responsible media outlets

Met raids Quaker meeting house and arrests six women at Youth Demand talk | UK news | The Guardian

(PS if you have a few dollars to help keep the Guardian afloat, reliable info is extremely valuable.

Quakers condemn police raid on Westminster Meeting House | Quakers in Britain

RantWoman might have posted more links but at this point, the computer she regularly uses did one of its periodic Microsoft Edge hiccups and RantWoman had to retrace her steps. So onward!

Free speech standards and laws are different in the UK. This commentary mentions a recently enacted "anti-protest legislation."

‘Utterly inappropriate’ arrests made on six women in Quaker meeting house

Climate Choir flashmob calls for rewilding for 30% of Church of England properties

RantWoman finds this video VERY cheering..

RantWoman STRONGLY advises any faith community considering property changes to consider what it can do for LEED gold or silver, carbon sequestration, biodiversity within the locations and projects under consideration.

Missing BS Discernment Update

What? Readers thought RantWoman was offering some kind of sarcastic commentary on something rather than a neutral reprise of an email subject line? Please bear with RantWoman who is doing the best she can about many realities.

RantWoman thanks a Wednesday night Quaker Bible study participant for mentioning a proposed community discussion of information gathered by the current campus discernment committee. RantWoman would consider inviting herself to the party but due to schedule conflicts will attend the Bible study the Friend above will miss and then, because more Zoom is always better, go to yet another Quaker practice among non Quakers Zoom meeting.

First, RantWoman is clear to reprint two articles from Gleamings, the Meeting newsletter.

September Newsletter

August Newsletter article

Next

Previous RantWoman commentary

RantWoman notes with interest:

--Judging by hit counts, RantWoman's previous commentary has been read by an encouraging number of people.

--A number of points in the previous commentary are reflected in others' offerings. Some remain stunningly absent. In other words, this community remains sorely in need of insights RantWoman has to offer. The glaring need stiffens RantWoman's resolve to try to continue delivering these insights.

--RantWoman thanks everyone who participated in the interviews and appreciates the work of compiling comments.In general RantWoman appreciates Friends again picking up the work of this badly needed discernment.

--RantWoman appreciates the recognition that neither "Do Nothing" nor "sell completely and do whatever" options offer much appeal.

Questions which rise for RantWoman from a fast read of Gleamings articles:

1. What questions, current or new, need further discernment?

2. What outside expertise are Friends ready to invest in to aid in further discernment about steps forward? 

Yes, RantWoman realizes this may be getting ahead of where things go but does remember from previous discernment efforts a strong sense that services from outside professionals needs to figure in the picture.

3. What learnings do Friends bring either from previous discernment efforts at UFM or from household adventures such as remodelling a bathroom, putting in or taking out carpet, or other projects. Are there considerations of timing, timelines, interest rates or other factors that need to figure in the picture?

4. RantWoman notes LOTS of concern about parking. Two further points:

--RantWoman alternates between either hating parking garages with a pink and purple passion or thinking that a parking garage could become a valuable revenue source. 

--What alternate ways of getting to and from Meeting might both ease parking concerns and meet the changing needs of people with canes, walkers...? 

     RantWoman spends a lot of time thinking and participating in "public engagement" about related topics and wonders whether others besides RantWoman consider transportation considerations an important topic to explore as discernment evolves. What opportunities exist in conjunction with existing public transit in the area? RantWoman is still chewing over other opinions

5. Where is there a sense of abundance? Abundance of energy, commitment, passion, trepidation, optimism...?

RantWoman will stop here for now but may add additional thoughts.

Happy Discerning.

Reprint from September Newsletter

 What F/friends Said -- answers to the campus discernment survey, 2024

by Amanda Franklin and Lois Loontjens

In spring and summer 2024, the revived Campus Discernment ad hoc committee attempted to  have 1:1 contact with everyone associated with UFM: members and attenders, active and not,  including those who have not participated in the life of the meeting for many years but are still  choosing to be listed in our directory. We did this out of a desire to solicit every interested  person’s voice, and out of a recognition that many people don’t attend business meeting and  might not come to an in-person or virtual meeting on the topic. We also wanted to listen  carefully to everyone, hoping that a 1:1 conversation would give the time and privacy for each  person to speak their mind.

We attempted contact with 177 people, and succeeded in speaking with 99 -- some very active  with UFM, some formerly active, and some at a distance (one in Japan!) Another 78 people  either did not respond, or declined to participate. We did not succeed in initiating contact with  everyone, due to the limitations on the committee’s time and energy, and the fact that not  everyone is listed in the directory and some did not respond to bulletin/listserv/verbal  announcements. But we are confident that we reached out to nearly everyone whose name we  recognized.

We asked people four questions. The results of our inquiries were summarized in the August  and September ’24 Gleamings. What follows here is a more lengthy discussion of the  responses.

How long have you been associated with UFM?

About 20% of respondents had been associated with us for less than five years, and another  20% for 40+ years, with the rest pretty evenly distributed over each decade in between (5-10,  10-20, 20-30, 30-40). For people who have been away for many years, we counted the years  they actively participated at UFM. About a third of respondents had come to UFM within the last  decade. The strength and range of people’s opinions did not particularly correlate with how long  a time they had been part of UFM.

What role do you think our campus should play in supporting the root  purpose and work of University Friends Meeting?

These might well be differently-worded but identical answers: half of the respondents said that  our root purpose is to be a spiritual community, and about a third said our root purpose is to  worship together, while many people gave some version of both answers. Other people talked  about UFM as a place for spiritual seekers, those wishing to enquire and grow, those who want  to follow the Quaker tradition together, and those who embrace traditional Quaker values such  as peace and justice.

The role of the campus in upholding UFM’s root purpose yielded these responses, in  approximate descending order:

* a place for Quaker education, committee meetings (pre-pandemic especially), the  library, art installations, children’s activities, games, celebrations of life transitions, and  fellowship; a place to support people’s leadings in the world

* the grounding that having a physical home provides to our UFM community. Fully a  third of respondents mentioned some version of these first two items

* an affordable venue for values-compatible groups to hold events and celebrations

* our physical presence witnesses to our larger community, particularly the UW and the  University District. A number of people noted that we were established as an outreach  to UW students, and some thought we should step up our efforts in this regard

* the location of the campus is relatively central for the greater Seattle area, and  relatively accessible by non-car transportation

* a rental space for current or former tenants (SIMS, Facing Homelessness, QuEST,  SHARE, AFSC, Nakani, preschool, contra dances…)

* the serenity and physical witness that our beautiful grounds, meetinghouse, and  worship space provide for those within and those who pass by. Many people praised the  worship room specifically, both for the effect it has on them, and for the oft-noted sense  of how the space is made sacred by its spiritual and communal history

Other people noted that Quaker activities, particularly worship, suffer when conducted on line;  that it is challenging to be a Quaker in isolation; that we don’t have many spaces for several  groups to meet at once; and that a rental space does not provide the same grounding as owning  a physical home does. 

Some respondents believe that, over time, the increasing demands on our time and money  detract from our fulfilling our root purpose, while a few noted that working together on  maintaining our buildings and grounds provides opportunities for deepening community.  Several question whether we ought to be landlords or lease holders at all, either because this  proves a distraction from what we ought to be doing, or because it keeps us from being  financially self-sustaining. Others said that we are not visibly carrying out our root purpose of a  commitment to social justice.

Even among people who praised our physical space, though, fully ten percent said that owning  the campus itself is not part of our root purpose, noting that South Seattle and Salmon Bay  Friends are long-established meetings that do not own.

What are your thoughts about any or all of the four options?

Respondents were offered the chance to offer any Light they might have on any of the four  options for the use of our campus:

1. remain as is: most respondents spoke strongly against this option, with many citing the  rising costs in money and labor hours to keep us going. Some spoke nostalgically about  wishing we could remain the same, and five people affirmed that we should go on as we are.  Others pointed out that, with a shrinking and aging membership, option #1 becomes less and  less tenable over time, and some candidly remarked that they themselves couldn’t put in the

time and labor to maintain the status quo. Some spoke against the wisdom of our being  landlords at all, or of financially sustaining ourselves on rental income.

2. redevelop part of the campus: most respondents favored this or the next option, with  some being unclear which of the two would be the wiser course of action, and many asking for  an explicit proposal to consider. Although there were concerns about parking, the people who  spoke to option #2 generally favored redeveloping Quaker House (and perhaps the parking lot as well). Favored uses included housing (most often mentioned, often specifying for low income folks or a low-income/market rate mix), along with Quaker-adjacent office spaces, as  well as a Quaker retirement community. Several respondents pointed out that UFM itself should  not try to manage a redevelopment project, or a redeveloped campus. Others thought we  consolidate in the meetinghouse and not offer rental space any more. Additional suggested  uses included public gathering spaces both indoors and outside, a coffee house, and a  playground/childcare. People spoke with concern about the needs of our renters, particularly  SIMS given its recent major renovation, as well as about the availability of parking – particularly  for those who are car-dependent. Several praised the architecture of the meetinghouse, and  strongly urged that it be preserved as an historically significant building which is imbued with  decades of Spirit.

3. redevelop the entire campus (meetinghouse, parking lot, and Quaker House): there  were a number of detailed visions under this category:

* go the route of other churches who have worked with the Faith/Land initiative, and use  our entire redeveloped campus to provide many units of housing, with a stipulation that  we would retain needed worship, meeting, and parking spaces in some new building

* consult with Seattle Unity, which has apparently done something similar and has  retained (lifetime?) use of its sanctuary and Sunday parking spaces while a developer  has built up around it

* partner with some other organization, perhaps Native/Indigenous, to effect land  reparations while still being able to meet on UFM land. This might take the shape of  deeding our property over while retaining lifetime rights

* take advantage of City of Seattle zoning changes which facilitate churches building  housing; perhaps partner with the city

* relocate the worship room to the top floor of a multi-story building, providing many  windows to take in the wider view to visually enhance our worship, and rent it out as a  desirable venue (weddings/concerts/conferences, etc) the rest of the week

* this option should provide housing for targetted groups, such as: low income or  formerly unhoused tenants; people who work for the UW, or in the U District, and who  are currently priced out of living near their jobs; retired Quakers (perhaps an allocated  number of units); and Indigenous people

* a rooftop childcare facility/play area that would be available for Quakers on Sunday  mornings, for a preschool during the week, and for tenants the rest of the time

Some spoke favorably of the tangible witness that this use of urban space could offer to Seattle,  both in using the air space above our current campus for the good of all, and in perhaps

effecting a very practical land reparation. Others suggested that building family housing could  attract families to our Meeting, particularly if the name of the building were something like  “Quaker House.” Others pointed out that, once the upheaval was over, this step would ensure  UFM’s financial stability into the future.

Concerns included finding a place to meet during construction; keeping our community intact  during a long disruption of the campus; the loss of our current, much-loved worship room; the  availability of parking; the unreliability of partnerships with outside agencies, and the uncertainty  that we could still have the campus for Quaker uses into the future; and discerning who might undertake this massive, years-long project. 

People who spoke against this option mentioned the loss of our existing worship room; the  massive amount of time, money, and energy which would be called for, particularly as our  Meeting shrinks and ages; and the wishful thinking that we could find the funding for this large scale project.

One suggestion was that we keep our existing committees and business meeting during  reconstruction, but join with other local Quaker meetings for in-person worship for the duration.

4. sell and move: nearly all respondents were firmly against this option, pointing out that we  would never find a centrally located option to buy; that our building is a witness to Seattle; and  many simply asking, “ but where would we go?” Several people spoke in strong opposition to  allowing our land to pass into commercial hands, where a developer would build market-rate 

housing for profit.

A minority pointed out that we are sitting on a financial goldmine with resources that could be  put towards Quaker leadings or permanently assuring our financial stability, and that our smaller  meeting could be well-housed in a smaller building. Several people have concerns over the  changes in our neighborhood, and the difficulty in finding parking. A couple of people pointed  out the practical advantages of being long-term renters, and mentioned the growing availability  of unused office spaces. Three respondents thought that selling and moving was the best  option.

Other people vigorously asserted that we should not let go of an irreplaceable asset – and that  we’d never get unity to do this, anyway.

5. sell Quaker House: although this was not offered as one of the options, about 10% of  respondents specified that this is what we should do. This would provide a financial windfall,  and free us up from maintaining an elderly building.

6. keep worship room: enough people emphasized this point that it almost became its own  category. Respondents noted the sense of centered peace it offers, and the connection to  decades of Quakers they feel simply by entering its space.

7. other thoughts: several people suggested that we need to come up with a vision for our  future, which would point the way towards right action, and which would engage people with  working towards a common goal. Respondents varied in their prediction of whether we will  retain enough members to be a viable meeting, with some pointing to our steady decline, and  others hopeful about the arrival of new and younger F/friends. Many people suggested that we  need to focus on attracting younger people and young families. Several people pointed out that

we do not have to be in a building to be a worshipping community, though others feel strongly  that being in a building really helps.

As UFM discerns what to do with our property, and when to do it,  what do you think is important to keep in mind/to pay attention to? 

There was less agreement here, but (in descending order of frequency) these concerns were  mentioned by three or more respondents:

* the value of our presence in the community, and our ability to serve our neighbors/city * the financial implications of any choices we do (or don’t) make, and a desire for input  from our Finance Committee

* the human energy it takes to remain as is, or to make any changes, with a recognition  that there is probably not a low-energy option available

* the importance of preserving our community, regardless of what option we might  choose

* considering and providing for the future, up to seven generations hence, even though  we cannot know what the future might hold

* getting more families, young people, and children to join us

* climate/environmental concerns, both in maintaining our current campus or in  redeveloping. People felt there were strong climate reasons in favor of each of the first  three options

* reparations to BIPOC

* Seattle’s housing crisis: we have land which could help to alleviate this problem,  which will just keep growing

* we need a communal vision or goal to guide us in this undertaking – how are we led? * we have a community which is aging and dwindling: what energy do we have to  facilitate each of the options? Will this energy continue to decline as our demographic  ages?

* we must listen to each other carefully and discern from what we hear

* accessibility concerns

* the time and energy it takes to sustain our aging buildings

* the sense that being landlords is not part of UFM’s mission

* the role UFM’s history has played throughout the years

* the need for parking

* staying true to Quaker values

* the decline in religious membership across all denominations

Where do we go from here?

The Campus Discernment Committee will host a community-wide potluck, presentation and  discussion on the evening of Wednesday, September 18. We will go over these responses  more thoroughly and suggest our next steps. 

Reprint of August Newsletter article

 Campus Discernment 2.0: What F/friends Said (PartI of II) Amanda Franklin and Lois Loontjens

The Campus Discernment Committee has been hard at work for several months, attempting to interview all  members/attenders about four questions. (If you were not contacted, our deepest apologies! The task proved  large, and some committee members had setbacks.)

This article summarizes what respondents said about who we are, what is the nature and purpose of UFM,  and what should guide us as we discern our future.

How long have you been associated with UFM?

We attempted contact with 177 people, and succeeded in speaking with 99—some very active with UFM, some  formerly active, and some at a distance (one in Japan!). Another 78 people either did not respond, or declined  to participate. A few not in the directory responded to invitations via verbal announcements, the bulletin or  the listserv. About 20% of respondents had been associated with us for less than five years, and another 20%  for 40+ years, with the rest pretty evenly distributed over each decade in between. The strength and range of  people’s opinions did not particularly correlate with how long a time they had been part of UFM.

What role do you think our campus should play in supporting the root purpose and work of  University Friends Meeting?

These might well be differently-worded but identical answers: half of the respondents said that our root  purpose is to be a spiritual community, and about a third said our root purpose is to worship together. Other  oft-mentioned root purposes included providing a meeting place for Quakers and non-Quakers, and renting  out our space for uses that align with our values. A third said that having a physical space provides a home or  a sense of groundedness, while generous handfuls praised the worship room specifically, the calm and beauty  and serenity of the meetinghouse and grounds, the benefits of being a visible presence in the U District, and  being able to provide a space for carrying forward our concerns for peace and social justice. Even among  people who praised our physical space, though, fully ten percent said that owning the campus itself is not  part of our root purpose.

As UFM discerns what to do with our property, and when to do it, what do you think is important to keep in mind/to pay attention to?

There was less agreement here, but (in descending order of frequency) these concerns were mentioned by  three or more respondents:

● Our presence in the community, and our ability to serve our neighbors/city

● The financial implications of any choices we do (or don’t) make

● The human energy it takes to remain as is, or to make any changes

● The importance of preserving our community

● Considering and providing for the future, up to seven generations hence, even though we cannot know  what the future might hold

● Getting more families, young people, and children to join us

● Climate/environmental concerns

● Reparations to BIPOC

● Seattle’s housing crisis

● What is our vision? what is our goal?

● We have a community which is aging and dwindling

● We must listen to each other carefully and discern from what we hear

● Accessibility

● What is God leading us to do?

● The time and energy it takes to sustain our aging buildings

● We should not be landlords!

● The role UFM’s history has played throughout the years

● The need for parking

● Staying true to Quaker values

● The decline in religious membership across all denominations

A Brief Summary

Although we are blessed by people who have been with us for decades, about a third of respondents have  come on board within the last ten years or so. Most people see the root purpose of UFM as being a spiritual,  worshiping community, with the role of the campus being to house community for Quaker activities and  fellowship, and for Quaker-aligned groups to meet.

As we discern our way forward, people mentioned spiritual/community concerns (keeping the community  connected, seeking leadings and discerning deeply from one another, clarifying our spiritual vision) and  practical concerns (we are aging and dwindling, it takes growing amounts of time and money and human  energy to keep our campus functional, and there are needs for social justice and for housing which our  campus might help address).

Next month’s article will summarize the Light we gathered on each of the four options on the use of our  campus.

Campus Discernment 2.0

Invitation in March 2024 | Gleamings (Newsletter)

Campus Discernment Committee Wants to Talk With You

 

Cutting to the chase

 

In 2017, University Friends Meeting convened its first ad hoc committee for discernment about the future of our campus. That group identified four main options, which Friends considered in a retreat on September 16, 2017:

1. Sell our property and relocate.

2. Stay and retain the Meetinghouse, Quaker House, and parking lots as is.

3. Stay on our property and redevelop it entirely.

4. Stay on our property and redevelop part of it.

There are many non- and for-profit institutions that UFM could partner with for options 3 and 4.

Before we offer any possibilities other than the status quo, the current Discernment Committee wants to hear the ideas of every member of the UFM community. We will begin making phone calls to you in the next few weeks, once we have the most recently updated Meeting directory. We anticipate conversations of 15-25 minutes, so we'll make appointments to talk if necessary. Please do not contact the committee by email; we want to talk with Friends.

 

Here are the questions we would like to discuss with you:

1. What role do you think our campus should play in supporting the root work and purpose of University Friends Meeting?

2. What are your thoughts about any or all of the four options? Is there anything you're particularly concerned or excited about?

3. As UFM discerns what to do with its property, and when to do it, what do you think is important for us to keep in mind and pay attention to?

We look forward to hearing how everyone in our community feels about the future of our campus.

Campus Discernment Committee

The Committee Gratitude and hope.

RantWoman has omitted names because she does not feel like printing names without asking permission and does not feel like asking for permission to use names

RantWoman is also cautiously grateful about Friends willing to serve on this committee, with a couple observations.

RantWoman does not know whether to be relieved or chagrined to see that this round of discernment includes none of the people involved in the previous round of discernment. The majority of the previous committee was well under 60 at the time. The previous committee was clerked by a daring mom who thought that clerking 3 committees would definitely be doable on top of raising 3 young kids and a schedule that always to RantWoman seemed so entangled with Seattle traffic that RantWoman just found it impossible even to figure out mutually feasible timeline for communications.

RantWoman is happy to acknowledge challenge on her part, although RantWoman also notes that RantWoman speaking of her transportation realities generated what RantWoman interpreted as a blank stare from a member of the vaunted Care and Accountability Committee.

 

RantWoman has come to understand that, although the previous small  committee produced some very useful research, RantWoman is not the only person who felt excluded, disrespected. RantWoman would have started out what was certain to be a multi-year process differently and bitten into scope and range of topics to be considered differently.

RantWoman is particularly hot about the previous discernment not even touching major changes in public transportation in the area, both in terms of opportunities and very real concerns about physical safety and relation to transportation issues RantWoman sincerely hopes that the new process will take steps to engender more trust and to engage about transportation issues for a worship community.

RantWoman also noted a Friend on the previous committee whose name appeared in many places on the Meeting roster and probably continues both to be very good at gatekeeping and oblivious to how exhausting and silencing that can be. If that Friend recognizes their behavior, and is interested in talking further, RantWoman STRONGLY urges that Friend to see whether we can come to a mutually agreement about a clearness process for appropriate assistance.

RantWoman does note that all but one of the names on the current committee are Friends well past 60. RantWoman hopes that people new to the community will have more of a sense thant RantWoman had last time that their concerns and insights are at the very least heard, and preferably taken seriously and valued.

RantWoman notes the passing of several much older weighty Friends since the previous discernment. RantWoman feels no call to hide frustration with younger greener Friends attached to previous discernment. RantWoman also sincerely hopes for a much better sense of mutual learning!

 

Invitation accepted!

RantWoman received this invitation through one of the communications channels she is permitted to interact with. So RantWoman is going to interact!

Readers may already y have noticed, RantWoman has A LOT to say. RantWoman may or may not say it all in one blog post.

IN PARTICULAR, RantWoman will be VERY happy to interact with one or more of the current committee members named in the communication RantWoman received.

While RantWoman contact information has probably been erased from as many resources as possible, RantWoman is quite sure that people know how to reach her. In the absence of outreach, Readers are to expect continued commentary in this blog. RantWoman will TRY to work with followup phone calls, with the following additional comments.

Processwise, RantWoman cannot deal with the request above to handle everything with phone calls. RantWoman WELL understands that email can be problematic. RantWoman’s experience with oral communications is that she frequently feels unheard and like very important insights are simply blured out of oral conversations, particularly one on one, and particularly if the point of contact has a strong tendency toward gatekeeping or is simply at sea with unfamiliar concepts. RantWoman sometimes finds one on one interactions exhausting and really appreciates moments where shared wisdom lead to something greater than any individual brings alone..

Further jumping up and down about matters of disability, first, RantWoman needs to speak in practical terms, not just in floods of intellectualized rhetoric. RantWoman reminds readers that there are many reasons besides need for shared discernment why written communication can be FAR preferable to phone. So, SORRY not to respond as requested but also wanting to make VERY clear the fact of this response.

 

Responding to the questions:

1. What role do you think our campus should play in supporting the root work and purpose of University Friends Meeting?

2. What are your thoughts about any or all of the four options? Is there anything you're particularly concerned or excited about?

3. As UFM discerns what to do with its property, and when to do it, what do you think is important for us to keep in mind and pay attention to?

 

RantWoman considers a Quaker worshipping community is a valuable presence in the University District, both for the value of worship and as a voice of conscience amid many economic pressures and societal upheavals.

 

RantWoman is VERY excited that UFM is ready again to take up questions of property stewardship which have been kicked down the road several times over past decades.

 

RantWoman is concerned that discernment recognize the need for professional resources, including financial management, urban planning, and administration of whatever results.

 

Regarding option 1, Sell and move: Work done previously suggests this decision could have large dollar signs attached to it, with need to discern about how to steward the resources. RantWoman thinks a Quaker presence in the University District is really important. RantWoman thinks an interesting question might be what if some of the community calved off and went elsewhere? RantWoman has no clear leading to discern about that but is open at least to listening to others’ opinions.

 

Regarding Option2: speaking plainly, a DUMB idea, at least without taking a serious look at financial projections. Lots of old building issues. Need for greater accessibility. RantWoman is intrigued to know that after many bumps with previous tenants and then pandemic, the Friends meeting now has a long-term rental sharing space with a Buddhist congregation. RantWoman wonders how that would figure in any financial analysis.

 

Options 3 and 4: Honestly, if UFM is going to endure all the clamor that would come with any redevelopment, RantWoman would prefer to do all of the following: design in a worship space, perhaps on the top floor, redevelop the whole property, with a strong emphasis on housing, green building standards, and gardening or green space, and finally as one person previously suggested, get a variance to allow even more usable space than current zoning does. RantWoman would at least like to hear more about why the suggested variance would not work or would be a long shot.

 

Composting old HURTS

RantWoman DOES NOT APOLOGIZE for interacting in a way that composts A LOT of old hurts and DOES hope that her observations will be beneficial to the whole process.

RantWoman REPEATS her LONGSTANDING  concern that it is just GHOULISH to someone who has gone through a life-changing medical event in midlife that in the future the only thing in a community that she will be permitted to interact with is memorials. RantWoman in fact, can easily become INFURIATED that this stance is considered a KINDNESS. There have been quite a few memorials. RantWoman misses several Friends who have passed away. RantWoman does not know how to say kindly, though, that RantWoman is not going to miss a sense from some beloved figures that if they could not deal with a topic themselves, it does not need to be dealt with.

RantWoman also gratefully notes that some concerns have been handled just in the course of technological evolution and community adoption of new technologies. Still, RantWoman persists in her call to create an environment that MIGHT be more able both to welcome the gifts and contributions of others like her and to adapt to changing realities in the future.

RantWoman gets that for the sight-dependent, interacting with someone who just CANNOT DO all the things that sight dependent people take for granted is challenging Further, in the realm of a single standard of Truth, while modern workplaces come with strong expectations that people will at least BE WILLING TO LEARN how to work constructively with many different disabilities and life circumstances, no one is born knowing how to deal with such challenges. Sometimes RantWoman can be forgiving. Sometimes RantWoman is simply persistent. Add philosophical about concerns that afflict many parts of her life and for better or worse are not unique to Friends.

 

RantWoman thanks readers who have the fortitude to make it all the way through these thoughts and offers sincere good wishes for a productive process.

 

In Light and faithfulness

 

RantWoman

 

 

More modest remembrance of Asia Bennett than this weeks farewells to Alexei Navalny

#WomensHistoryMonth #WomensHistoryMonth2024

This bus stop near Meeting was in remarkably good condition today,
especially compared to many past visits
documented in passing in this blog.
RantWomanblames cellphone oopses
for lack of a more topical photo

Today was Asia Bennett's memorial. 

Asia Bennett Seattle Times Obituary

Asia Bennett Seattle Times Obituary

Thematic comments:

1. For a faith tradition founded on the equality of Women, (see Margaret Fell) and credited historically with important connections to suffrage movements, only in the 20th century was Asia credited with being "the first woman to..." for a number of different Quaker organizations. Asia spent the early part of her career working in childcare. Her family's bio reported that she at some point noted how much dealing with toddlers--and their parents--prepared her for the many different leadership and personnel roles she took on within various Quaker organizations.

[RantWoman sometimes carries around in her head thoughts such as "a woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle." When RantWoman observes long-lasting marriages where deep love is obvious, though, RantWoman also firmly believes in supporting the partnership behind leaders so special Light and appreciation for Lee, Asia's husband of almost 77 years.] 

2. LOTS of people talked about Asia's capacity to listen. RantWoman meant particularly to note Vanessa Julye's comment about Asia's role in supporting Vanessa's early steps in the work of addressing racism within the Society of Friends. These thoughts did not make it out of RantWoman's mouth as a message in worship. They WILL be part of thoughts in another post only hinted at here.

3. LOTS of people commented about how Asia asking a question helped direct them toward or away from different forms of witness: aiming for revolution vs getting married, accepting AFSC staff vote to unionize consideration that the organization had a decades-long commitment to supporting unions, engagement about diversity with out LGBT Friends.

4. RantWoman admits to a little bit of frustration about mention of issues in days of yore with scant thought that some of those same issues are very much still throbbing, sometimes in new, highly mutated forms in the life of the world. One of Asia's gifts to the world is to plant seeds for helping new generations find paths among these challenging realities.

5. Inclosing,possibly weird advice to young people new to Friends: GO TO MEMORIALS. Even if you barely know the deceased and are afraid of not knowing a soul from your own generation, GO TO MEMORIALS. Learn. Okay, Asia famously told someone awed by Quaker weddings "oh wait until you see the memorials."

Techie notes.

1. RantWoman has special tirades related to memorials and visits UFM intermittently. Today aside from the bus shelter in LOVELY condition, . the visit revealed QR codes???? RantWoman loves the pblishers of Truth in whatever is the medium of the day. RantWoman is just not sure about QR codes on info sheets on a bulletin . board.RantWoman hopes the QR codes do what is intended. She also hopes the bar codes do not scare away people annoyed by bar codes or by the implication that one must be fluent in particular technologies to be a good Quaker.

2. Even at in-person events, RantWoman LOVES, LOVES, Loves signing into Zoom on her phone with audio disconnected in order not to interfere with room sound. RantWoman just LOVES knowing who all is on the Zoom. (RantWoman kind of means to experiment about these issues on other video conferencing platforms. 

3. RantWoman definitely appreciates evolution and continuing revelation about the world of movable mics and Room amplification in the world of hybrid / blended Zoom meetings. RantWoman also tartly remembers the first incarnation of a UFM committee on disabilities: there was a survey. There were minimal requests of the surveyors in Meeting for Business from anyone, alas including RantWoman. But great success was noted because of the next iteration of efforts to ensure that people, such as Asia, with hearing loss, could hear better. RantWoman has no desire to minimize these efforts. However, RantWoman CONTINUES TO TAKE SERIOUS ISSUE with the limitations of that as an approach to addressing matters of disability.