I am concerned given the last discussion!
Information is here: Action of Immediate Witness (AIW) Process
Here is what I wrote in Zoom, so that it continues past the session [typos corrected]:
In the past, all amendments were done at miniassemblies AT GA, not before them. Delegates would come with ideas for amendments that they had gotten from their congregation, from the GA e-mail list (long discontinued), from working groups, etc., and there would be votes at the miniassembly as to which should move forward to the floor. Some amendments the CSW would simply include in the floor version, a few others could be discussed by hte full GA. All of that has disappeared in favor of one miniassembly in late May/early June and no option for changes during GA.
1 Like
I think a number of factors are playing out here: (1) the process of submitting an AIW, vetting an AIW, and amending an AIW is detailed and not well understood; (2) the process involves a fairly rigid timetable (see below); (3) the process is not well suited for synchronous collaboration (I like the process outlined by Sally better; (4) I suspect the current process was an attempt to streamline the process - which helps on an online forum, but hampers discussion and evolution of proposals.
2026 timeline copied from link above note: less than 3 months from submission to vote:
Dates for submission:
- March 23: Submission for draft AIWs opens.
- April 24: AIW submission closes.
- May 1: CSW offers feedback to AIW proposers.
- May 8: Final drafts due. Authors will be notified if their AIW has been accepted by May 12 and the AIW will be submitted to our legal team.
- May 17-23: There will be online feedback sessions for each AIW. Proposers must plan to be present during these dates in order for congregations to engage and discuss the AIW. Presenters will then have a chance to rewrite their proposal in response to this feedback. These revisions must be submitted to the CSW by May 27th for final legal review.
- June 1: The final AIW will be posted and distributed and submitted to the General Assembly to consider for voting.
- June 7: AIWs responding to last-minute emergent issues ONLY may be submitted until June 7th, but will not be guaranteed the advantage of CSW feedback.
- June 14: General Sessions open.
- June 15: Presentation of all AIWs to the General Assembly.
I think there is a difficult balance between the “immediate” part of the action and a desire to be considered and not just reacting to something we learned about but don’t really understand. I’ve seen AIWs based on something that the sponsor just learned about shortly before GA and even ones that were just re-worked study-action issues.
I think the requirement that congregations be engaged and active in any revision processes is to make sure that the AIW is not just the GA talking to itself.
I agree that the process is not optimal for truly emergent issues. But emergent issues happen even when GA is not in session. In that case we rely on our elected and professional leadership to respond based on our values. That may be where the GA can best address these issue - by clarifying our values in ways that empower our leaders to respond in the moment, rather than trying to issue-specific statements.
Actions of Immediate Witness ARE just a statement by delegates to the GA; they are not meant to be a statement fgor all of UUism or all of the UUA—those come from CS/AIs, Congregational Study/Action Issues, which is a multiyear process of discernment. They have no real weight after their year, though they are part of the record of what concerned UU delegates at the specific time.
AIWs are a covenant that we make with each other.* They represent where our hearts are at a particular moment in time, but their promise should last beyond the Assembly.
*Part of what’s required in an AIW is a call to action taken not by the UUA but by the individual churches.