CATHLEEN YOUNG

2325- Howe Street

Berkeley, California 94705
May 12, 2015
Dear UUA Board,
Having resigned from Starr King last month, I am writing to provide myself some
closure, honestly, and maybe even do Unitarian Universalism itself a bit of good.
I genuinely hope so.
In the March 16
UU World,
an article entitled UUA trustees mull their role in Starr
King conflict included mention of investments of loyalty [that] became
interpersonal rather than loyalty to something higher as well as reference to very
strong feelings about what went down last year. Two reactions have circled around
in my head since then. One touches my own discomfort with interpersonal loyalties
and that leads to the second reaction, my own strong feelings. We who truly paid the
price would have a lot to say about strong feelings. I will continue, then, speaking
only for myself, frankly and hopefully not offensively.
Things boiled down to trustee negligence, after all. Here I mean SKSM trustee
negligence, and I would ask any who would deny that to bravely shake it off. I refer
to major opacities going back many years.
Starr Kings mess was entirely avoidable. Untold dollars were wasted, justice was
never served, and there is no excuse for what happened last year. Turning the place
into a war zone was both a travesty and an oxymoron where an institution makes the
claims for itself that Starr King does. Yet what went on was merely an extension of
longstanding incompetence: administratively untalented, inattentive leadership and
weak boards. Then when push came to shove, nobody spoke with responsible
insiders about what we had seen or what we might know. Why? (Dont accept the

first answer that comes to mind.) Had anyone taken the trouble long ago, the whole
thing couldve been prevented. Unitarian Universalism could have had two schools
and a stronger denomination. I can say with conviction that one of the schools (and
maybe both) could have been downright prosperous.
Dont leave critical lessons buried. Dig them up and look at them hard. Starr King is
absolutely relevant to the unchurched phenomenon because its entire
organizational culture is outdated and worse. Going forward, wherever people
gather to work together, lets ensure solid checks and balances. Insist upon readable
budgets. Use psychometrics during hiring. Establish standards to minimize
cronyism, bullying and scapegoating. Awaken awareness of social psychology.1 Do
that last one for several reasons. We now know all it takes is something as small as a
title change for behaviors to shift throughout an entire system.2 We now know
people do as theyre told even aware that they are injuring others. We know about
the Dark Triad and that disordered personalities are drawn to religious leadership.
We also know religious organizations have exempt legal status, which means bad
things can happen while there is no legal protection for employees who report them.
Trends in theological education aside, who has compared Starr Kings student v.
student support3 ratios over the years? If the costs of running theological schools
have risen, how much increase is truly reasonable? Whats more, who is sure the
rationale is reasonable (i.e., the New Educational Model implemented several years
ago)? Who evaluates top administration using first-rate models and verifiable data?
How do evaluators know data is complete? Do people honestly believe that
incompetent leaders who talk a bloody good line are about to volunteer their own
failings?
1

The field has advanced enormously since the last world war when scholars around the world sought to
understand why we are capable of unimaginably harming one another. Bystander intervention programs could
also apply or be otherwise adapted to counter institutional groupthink. (See works by John Darley, Ervin Staub.)
2
Extra significant where institutions emphasize titles and where people actually enter to earn culturally
meaningful titles.
3
Student support = employees, adjunct faculty, consultants. In other words, is the cost of running the school truly
known? How does it compare to costs from ten, twenty years ago? Why is the budget so hard to decipher? Have
unbiased experts assessed criteria for admission, and ratios of requests for admission vs. actual admissions? How
about now vs. ten, twenty years ago? How does student caliber compare now vs. ten, twenty years ago?

Starr Kings tuition is unnecessarily high. Speaking of interpersonal loyalties, if loyal

grads and students witnessed current inefficiencies and rewarded incompetence,
those loyalties would quickly change. How much have boards understood about the
inefficiencies and rewarded incompetence? From whence comes this pretense that
board members are freely elected?
Starr Kings pedagogy is problematic. Who asks experienced students where they go
to take classes? Who understands sources of division (not so much
points
of
division) in the student body? The school graduates people who reflexively accuse
others of racism, and they can expect reward for doing it. Some members of staff
have done the same, even accusing one another, usually in controlled environments
and frequently by innuendo. This is modeled and encouraged from the top.
Keeping a job at SKSM is not necessarily about cooperation or honesty. Cronyism is
over the top, constantly undermining organizational health and efficiency, and
administrators foster that too. In spite of profound fiscal implications, as far as I
know, Starr Kings boards never seriously studied or addressed entrenched
cronyism.4 Many board members are themselves a reflection of the practice.
Earlier I indicated that Starr Kings organizational culture leaves much to be desired.
I used to wonder if anyone up top ever cracked a book on modern management.
You cant come across books like
Lean Enterprise
(Humble, Molesky, OReilly) or
Start with Why
(Sinek) and not wonder about that. My theory is that fixing that layer
was actually up a couple of decades ago. When it didnt happen, things grew
malignant. I think that they did was related to the public face of the organization and
to Unitarian Universalism itself. The public persona of the institution did what its
leaders did, and the gap between its public persona and internal persona grew wider
than the Grand Canyon. If the place is to be saved, get the fuddy-duddies out and
bring in something fresh ~ actually appropriate for leftward values in 2015. Oddly
enough, I think it would mean reviving the spirit of original Unitarianism.

I know favoritism is hardwired and common. What's there is not common and needs to be addressed for all kinds
of reasons.

Thus Strapped Student was right. The presidential search process was corrupt
because the system was thoroughly corrupt. All that happened during the spring of
2014 was that at a critical moment, management got caught behaving typically.5 And
yes, the real knockout came next. Bystanders were persecuted for months while the
very leaders who contributed directly to the moment also allowed that rather than
come forward. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were wasted. I know firsthand
about a quick quarter million absolutely vaporized. While Freds committee set
about its empty charge, another staffer who had handled some finances and
questioned expenses resigned (bullied out of course). Who noticed? A third staffer
who resigned also carried perspective about money squandered.
Back to interpersonal loyalties, to the degree Starr King was caught up in them,
those most glaring were ~ still are ~ at the top. They led an institutional governance
based on unfathomable falsity. I need to say that Strapped Students impulse was
ethical. Strapped was set up by the school itself. And further, if it is true that on the
search committee Jo Sanzgiri brought new malignity to view, she was absolutely
consistent with both her religion and her culture. If Starr King were authentically
multicultural and multireligious, we would grok her conundrum. Jo was reared in
original Satyagraha. Her parents were with Gandhi, you know. To me, Jo and
Strapped are heroes and so are Julie, Suzi, and all who dissented.
Ive skimmed, believe it or not. No doubt Ive stepped on toes and for that I
apologize. No doubt Ive raised subjects that some of you
have
looked into, and I
am the one who is clueless. I think this is unavoidable when elementally connected
organisms are kept separate. That should also be parsed, as should matters of power
and invisible influence.
I still need to say I believe that wherever we have power, especially powers of
persuasion, we have privilege. With that privilege comes the responsibility to be as
informed as possible concerning our spheres of influence. It is not okay to
If anyone wants the complete story exactly as it was, let me know. I was there, involved from the beginning, as

were Rebecca, Gabriella, Kat (registrar), and Noach Dzmura (formerly Ibrahim's assistant, bullied out around an
administrative snafu traceable to Ibrahim).
5

continually exert power where we lack adequate understanding. It is not okay to

exert ones power to quash knowledgeable, reasonable voices. And yes, its all messy.
Working together is terribly messy, but after this long, harsh experience, I think it is
truth that is most needed at every turn, individually and organizationally, and that we
will never find it quickly or ethically by coercion after years of neglect.
Thank you each one for your attention and for your own caring and hard work.
Farewell,
Cathleen
Cathleen Young
oliveeyedcat@att.net
510.845.5487