First thing: Bob Simmons suggested posting the text of the proposed by-laws amendments on the web, so here you go.
Amendment No. 1 would change Article VII, Section A from this:
Up to four (4) members shall serve on the Board of Deacons. They shall be elected at the Annual Congregational Meeting. The term of office shall be two (2) years with the term of two (2) Deacons expiring each year.
Up to six (6) members shall serve on the Board of Deacons. They shall be elected at the Annual Congregational Meeting. The term of office shall be two (2) years with the term of half expiring each year.
Amendment No. 2 would add a new section to Article XIV as follows:
Employees, Officers, Board Members and Committee Members will avoid conflicts of interest in the performance of their duties. Such conflicts arise when their decisions or actions would materially benefit themselves or others related by birth or marriage. Conflicts of interest may also arise in decisions concerning employment, performance review or discipline of an employee who is related by birth or marriage. Regulations and guidelines for the avoidance of conflicts are found in a "Conflict of Interest" policy adopted by the Board of Elders.
Remember, May 16 is the deadline to vote on these changes.
Second thing: we hosted the skate-park meeting on Thursday as planned, and several church attenders came to speak. A small contingent of skateboarders argued (very politely!) against building at the much less desirable Tam O'Shanter site, which could not acommodate below-ground structures. And the city of Kelso community development director and his staff spoke highly of the Rotary Park site and of their belief that the park's impact on property values would be positive. Friday's Daily News has more details on those arguments.
The other side of the story was the unashamed display of NIMBYism from nearby homeowners who felt the wants of those who own the land for the park, those who build the park, and those who use the park should take a distant second, third, and fourth to the wants of those who live down the street from the park. As my last post said, East Hills does not take a side on this. But if offered a vote on the skate park, I think Thursday's ugly display of selfishness would push me to the skaters' side.