Zdaj smo pričali prišličiti prvičjev v komparizmu prinsipu. Zdaj mi pričeli, kaj je taj situacij, kaj je to način, kaj je taj bar, a je to b, a je to e. In v tem pokazati. Zato smo ... Zato da se počujem, na glasne teorem, in na teorem da se vseče. Gatsne teorem ne ne ne ne ne, tako omega je sveča, da se zeprešel. C1, da se toreče, na vseče omega, na teorem da je eta. In početno, da bomo početne traje v zelo, da smo vzeli, da je 1 omega bar. To je početno, da imamo početno vzelo. To je zelo, da je zelo, da je zelo, da je zelo, da je zelo, da je zelo. Tako to je omega, to je nu, omega. Tako to je nekaj za nas, ker smo božemo zapraviti to, z našem vektorom. Vse, da vse, bi se načno bil taj nekoliko, da je skazajis glasbeno, da je je to zelo v blaži, pa je se paje na vse, da je to dobe vse, da je to za taj nekoliko, da je to za taj nekoliko, staj, en da smo vznikaj vsega terapezoidalj vznik. Taj je vznik. Vznikaj, da smo taj. Zelo, ki je, da je... E je ljpeščit. Boundari v E je ljpeščit.  Kako V je C1, to je tudi prejmo, da, da veče ste vzupi vzupi v C1, tudi točno je lipšič. In tega, to je zelo vsočno, kako smo zelo vsega vsega vsega. Vsega, lepšiče, kontynuoče in kontynuoče vsega. In tega, različno, že to je lepšič, to je vsega vsega vsega vsega in ne vsega, ali taj nezavrši, bo izdaril je, da je vse vse zelo občak, in nezavrši vse zelo občak. So, tudi, da Ita je vse zelo občak in tudi, da je zelo občak vse zelo občak, in zelo sem oddišla, da receivingi, da je jo zaradi vse ob insecure Sunuje. To je s nekaj vse ulebego vse, da je več vse vse ulebego. En omega tukaj kaj je nekaj vse ulebego vse. Nekaj bil vse občast. Vseh to srenje unice, do radoče. Preplačaj, da počutek je završutno zobčatila nowo, e-gredne deljezme počutek.  Tako, in tko in tega spliti v dve pravje. Tako, je to tega, kaj je ovo tega, kaj je ovo tega, kaj je ovo tega, kaj je ovo tega, Over the two yellow segments, so it's... So, let me quickly denote by this, okay? And then, so the H1 plus the integral over the two lateral segments. Is it clear? Daj, zato tazza se tako zelo površana. Sete, so nekaj zelo površana. Zato je vesel, tako da se je zelo površana iz tej viznej segmenti, pri toj stri, a je to boto so. Zato, da sem sem način, da je to je nekočnico. To je nekočnico, da je tvoj nekočnico. Vznikaj, vznikaj, je vznikaj na t-bar, ker je t-bar, in vznikaj, vznikaj, je vznikaj, taj vznikaj, taj vznikaj, je vznikaj. I zelo trebowamo, delošno, načo je l consequence vznikaj, pa je taj nino, vznikaj vznikaj nevertheless je vznikaj. To je doskri, kar nervnimo vznikaj vznikaj. Zelo vznikaj, da vznikaj, da vznikaj je vznikaj, v, and this was the definition of W, and at time zero, this was the definition, and at time zero, this is obviously equal to this, which by assumption was non-positive, because this function u of zero, remember that u of zero by assumption is less than is less than or equal than V of zero. This is assumption. Therefore, this is non-positive, and therefore, this is non-negative, the minus in front. Yeah, in particular. Therefore, this is equal to the integral over this shorter segment. I could write integral between a and b, actually. W plus of t bar, the other variable is, say, x dx. Do we agree? So we have for the moment that so zero is larger than or equal to the integral on the interval a, b of w plus of t bar x dx plus 2. Because 2 is exactly this integral. So now, so this is 2. Assume that we are able to prove that 2 is assume that we can prove that 2 is non-negative. If we are able to prove that 2 is non-negative, then we have the inequality this w plus of t bar x dx, non-negative. So we have this. Assume that we are able to prove this, then we are here. And therefore, we conclude, since w plus. So we conclude that, necessarily, for almost every x in a, b, w plus of tx is equal to zero. Because w plus is non-negative. But its integral is non-positive. And therefore, necessarily, this must be zero, almost everywhere. If, OK, there is a problem of regularity here, because this should be defined exactly at this slice. And maybe, well, no, this is lep sheet. So no problems. It's defined also at this slice. So OK, this is OK. We agree? But then a and b were a, b, and t bar were arbitrary. T bar was arbitrarily chosen between zero and capital T. T bar is arbitrary. A, b were arbitrary. Therefore, for any t bar, for any a, b, we have this. For almost every x in a, b. And this implies that w plus is zero. But t bar is arbitrary. A and b are arbitrary. And this is actually exactly what we want to prove. Because saying this is equivalent to say that u is less than or equal than v. So this is our thesis, actually. This is equivalent to say that u is less than or equal than v. So what remains to show is that 2. So if you accept this, we need to show that 2 is non-negative. Once we know that 2 is non-negative, then the proof is concluded. So the point is to show that the integral. Now we have to compute the unit normal. So these lines are so here. This is equal to so nu t. And nu t here. So we have this is integral omega plus c. Because in one case, the normal is parallel to 1c. And in the other case, the normal is parallel to 1 minus c. So in this case, dividing by the length of these vectors, we find that this is equal up to the denominator of the length of these vectors v plus. And the other part is equal to, so there is the whole 1 divided square root 1 plus c square here. 1 divided square root 1 plus c square here. So and then there is the other integral w plus minus c f of u v v plus. So, which is equal up to this factor, which is, of course, as a sign is positive. So then I can write it as follows w plus c plus f of u v plus integral w plus. Or maybe I made a mistake on the sign probably here. Let me check. F of u v. So probably I made a mistake on the sign. So that probably there is a minus here in the plus here. Yes, indeed. So sorry, there is a mistake here. There is minus. It is minus plus minus. Now, this is, of course, larger or equal than 0. This is, of course, larger or equal than 0. And now you have to remember the definition of c, because c was the maximum of f prime of y, such that y is l l.  And so you see that c is so large that c plus f of v is necessarily larger or equal than 0. This is maybe homework, but it's very easy from the definition. So this is so large so that this, even if this is negative, this is so large that this is non-negative, positive. And similarly, this is so large that, even if this is positive, then this is negative, but still this is so. Because of the choice of c made in the beginning, we have this. And therefore, this is larger than or equal than 0. This is also larger than or equal than 0. And therefore, 2 is larger than or equal than 0. And this concludes the proof of this delicate sketch, just sketch of the proof of this comparison result. Maybe I left you an exercise yesterday. So the exercise was the following. Assume that b is equal of b of tx, depending on time space. And let x of s tx solve the following characteristic system. Our notation, who I think was this, and x of t is equal to x. And then define u of tx as the solution, as the function u bar at x, starting at time t at the position x, and up to time t. This was the claim. This was the definition of u. And the claim was that then ut plus b grad u is equal to 0. And u equal to bar. This was the exercise. So the idea was to start at some point here tx. And then let run the trajectory of the solution of this system, actually of this equation. Now we are in one space dimension, actually. Because n is equal to 1 of this equation, starting at time t at the position x. And let us flow it up to time capital t. So we reach a point here. And then the claim is that this function here solves our linear transport equation with final condition. This was the claim, the homework. OK, first of all, let us see what happens at the final time. So if this is small u, then this is equal to u bar at x t tx. And therefore, I am here. I start at time capital t at the point x. And I run for 0 time, because I start at time t. And I look at the same time t. So I am at x. I'm starting at x. And so by definition, this is u bar of x. Because my ode, my equation there, capital x at capital t, what is it? It is the solution of the ode, which at time capital t start at this point x. Time capital t is started. At this point x. And then nothing happens. I mean, there is nothing to solve here, because it's just an initial condition. So by definition, x at capital t, capital t, x is x. Fine. Now, so what does it mean? It means that our claim, so I define u as follows, then at least u satisfies this condition. So the boundary condition is OK. OK, so u satisfies this. Now we have to check that u, defined as follows, satisfies the PDE also. Also. Well, one way, let us try to do this. So maybe in the exercise, sorry, b maybe was just b of x. Sorry, so that we write this. Maybe check the notes of yesterday, but maybe it was b of x. OK, sorry, b equal b of x. Now, let us make the following remark. So sorry for the notation, because t is smaller than s, exactly opposite as in the alphabetic symbols. Sorry. But I used this notation because from the beginning, here this dot was d over ds. So this was a function of s. So now I take it again as a function of s and I fix t, but t is smaller than s. Usually in books maybe you find exactly the opposite. This is d over dt. And then you fix s, which is smaller than t, like in the alphabetic order. But since we started from s, OK. So let us remark the following semi-group property of capital X. So now I want to use specific symbols. So let us take 0 less than or equal than t, less than or equal than s, less than or equal than capital T. And then I put something inside, OK. So as I said, t is less than s. So this is in agreement with our notation, OK. And then I insert a tau in between. And so the idea is the following. Now I have t, tau, and s. Now if I consider the solution of the OD, which starts at time t and arrives at time s starting at the point x, so x evaluated at the final time s, starting at the initial time t from the point x, by uniqueness of the solution of the ODs, is nothing else. Now I let run the trajectory for some time up tau. So and then I take as initial condition the time tau at the position, this position, and I let it go up to time s, by uniqueness. So I take an intermediate point on the trajectory, and I take that intermediate point as the new initial condition. That is, if I make a jump, say, from here to here, then it's the same that if I go from here to here along the solution, and then from here to here. This is because we have uniqueness of solutions of the OD. And now I want to express this. Let us try not to make confusion with the symbol. So I start. Now, what is this point here? What is this intermediate point? Well, this intermediate point is what? I'm starting from t at the point x, and then I let it go for time tau. Then I take this as the initial point starting at time tau, and then I let it, the solution, go for time, at final time s. So we have this equality. Let me check that I am correct, hopefully. Apparently, yes. So do we agree? So this is just the semi-group property. So now we can differentiate this. This is valid for any tau in between t and s. So we can differentiate it with respect to tau. So do we agree? Have you understood this equality? Are there questions on this? Of course, this is a sort of group property. OK, anyway, it is called like this. So I have this for any tau in between, which is the smaller t and s. Therefore, since this is an equality valid on an interval, everything is smooth. I can differentiate it with respect to tau, and still the quality of derivatives remains. So differentiating this with respect to tau gives us 0 equal, and now we have x, t evaluated at s tau x tau tx plus xx s tau x tau tx. So this is multiplied by the derivative of x with respect to x s tau tx x dot. And this x s, which is x dot, actually, x s is x dot, because dot is equal to d over ds, remember? And remember our notation. Now, so this is b of what? Of x tau tx. So now take, so we have to remember this equality, and take tau equal to t. Let us rewrite it in particular for tau equal to t. And so I rewrite it here, so x tau t s t. Now, if I take tau equal to t, this here, what is this object now? x. Thank you. xx s tx times b of tx. And this is equal to 0. That is useful. Let me check it's OK. x t s tx b tx apparently is OK. Now we can forget this. Just remember that equality differentiating the semi-group property, we can go back to our definition and compute separately ut and ux. So from this, we have that ut at tx is equal to u bar prime evaluated at x t tx times the derivative x t t tx, b of t. Ah, sorry, thank you, sorry, sorry, b of x, sorry. Just for simplicity, thank you. And then ux of tx is equal to u bar prime of x capital t tx x of t capital tx, OK? So now you see. Now let us put small s equal to capital t here. This is true for any s. So in particular, for s equal to capital t. You see, if you substitute, now that you can multiply this by b of x, if you want, OK, multiplying by b of x is equal to b of x. Now if you substitute this with minus x t capital t tx, then you immediately see that this plus this is equal to 0, because they are opposite, exactly, one or the opposite of the other. There is a minus. So maybe I have, yes, maybe we can just, did you try the exercise of yesterday for the Berger's equation? So maybe we can go through quickly through the exercise. I left yesterday for the Berger's equation. So the exercise, remember well, was ut plus f prime of u ux equal to 0, where so let us take the flux, the flux function f of y equal to y square over 2, so that this is nothing else, the Berger's equation u x equal to 0. And u of 0 was u bar, u bar and u bar at time 0, t plus r. And u bar of x was now 1 divided by 1 plus x square. So actually, we are identifying sigma. Sigma is going to 0 sigma. And sigma is identified with x. So sigma is identified with x. With our notation. So this was the embedding, remember, phi from r into r2. This was the parametrization of sigma, capital sigma. And now, so the system of characteristics, so we have n equal to 1, so we have x1 dot b, the vector field b of x of say t, x and y is what? With our notation. The vector field b, 1, y. So x dot is equal to x1 dot is equal to 1, x2 dot is equal to y, y dot is equal to 0, x1 of 0 is equal to what? x1 of 0, 0, x2 of 0 is equal to sigma, which actually is equal to x. And y of 0 is equal to u bar of phi of sigma. And so is equal to 1 divided by 1 plus sigma square. This is our situation. We can solve these solutions. We can solve this, for instance, giving y of s and sigma is equal to what? So is 1 plus sigma, because this must be square, simply. Doesn't depend on s. And then we have, say, x1 of s and sigma is just s, I think, because I'm starting from 0. So at the end, this will be identified with t, as usual. And x2 dot must be equal to 1 divided 1 plus sigma square, which gives us x2 of s and sigma, actually equal to s divided by 1 plus sigma square. And then we have the initial condition, which is sigma. So we have this. Now, our change of variable is the map taking s sigma. So maybe can I now s call it t. So s can be identified with t now, as usual. So, well, if you don't like s, s divided 1 plus sigma square plus sigma. And this is our diffemorphism around the strip containing sigma, capital sigma. And this we want to invert it. But maybe the inverse is not so easy, because we want to solve for, say, t equal s. But then we want to solve for, say, x equal to t, divided plus sigma. So, given t, maybe I write it as equal t. So given t and x, now I know it is invertible. I know it is invertible locally. And I want to find s of tx and sigma of tx. So, given t, s is simply equal to t. It's OK. But given x sigma, so given x, I want to solve for sigma. So, I want to find 1 plus sigma square x minus t minus sigma times 1 plus sigma square. So, given t and x, solve for sigma, which is not so easy, actually. No? So, actually, it's not easy. And therefore, we leave it as it is. We don't solve it explicitly. Just leave it implicit. We know that locally, for small time, we can solve. Because we know that locally d is a difemorphizm. So, this should give for t less than some capital T. And x in r, say, this gives us sigma solution of tx. One solution only for small times. So, at the end, u of x is equal to y, u of tx, sorry, u of tx, is equal to y, y of s of x, s of tx, sigma of tx. And therefore, which is equal to 1 divided 1 plus sigma square of tx, and u of tx, and x is t divided. So, we have sort of implicit representation of our solution, u, locally. Is it OK? OK, this is not u of tx equals something, depending on tx, unfortunately, it remains a little bit implicit. With other symbols, since, OK, t was identified with s, t was equal to s. And we have already said that we can identify the parameter sigma with x. So, we can change names, and place x in place of sigma, maybe, is more, more. So, u of t at the end, u of t, t divided by 1 plus x square plus x is equal to 1 plus x square. Yes, we have to be a little bit elastic with these changes of names of the symbols. And this is, so, the expression of x of t, the expression of x of x1, x2 was, say, t, and then t plus x. This was x2 of t, x2 of s. This was x2 of s, in the defied s with t. So, let us try to see, to write down, so these are curves in the plane, actually lines, if you want. So, the parameterization is just t into this, t into this. And x can be considered now as a parameter. So, fix x, say, x here. And then I have a parameterization of a line, which is, I don't know, x positive. So, I pass through here, say, when t is 0, I am here positive. And the coefficient here is changes when I move x, which is now a parameter, but, say, it is sort of positive, so sort of this, like this. Now I move x. And remember that our solution is the value of u bar. Our solution here is the value of u bar. I mean, u is sort of constant along this line. Constant depending on x, because we know that, well, remember our expression.  It is written here. I mean, the right hand side is independent of t. So, once I fix x, and I draw this line, then I take the value of u bar at the value x, at the number x, this is u bar of x. Now, I change line. So, I take another x here, and I want to understand what happens to the line. I think that it happens to the line. I mean, x is here now. So, I am passing through here at time zero. But the coefficient now, x is larger. The coefficient is larger. One of it is smaller. What happens to the line? Yeah, it becomes, the point is here, unfortunately, is that t is vertical. But when the coefficient here is smaller, the line becomes, you try to become, say, more parallel to the vertical axis. If you put t here, then you understand, you may be more familiar. So, when the coefficient is smaller, then you try to become horizontal, if t is here. And now t, for some reason, strange reason, is vertical. So, this means that now my line is this. Problem. There is a problem, right? So, we can say some sort of this, maybe, okay, maybe sort of this, this. No, this is sort of this, and so on. So, there is, in this picture, a first time, there is a first initial, first time, such that two of these lines meet, there is a first time, t-sing, where two of these lines meet, and before it, they never meet. No, in this case, t-sing is not equal to zero. In this case, t-sing is positive and should be computed. I don't know exactly what it is, but I think it can be computed. Yes, t-sing is non-zero. Yes. The question is, well, t-sing equal to zero would mean instant singularity. You start from an initial condition, which is u-bar, and the question, if t-sing is equal to zero, this means that instantly the solution makes something very strange. I don't know, it breaks the graph, makes a single jump, something like that. This is not the case for this equation. T-sing appears, is a singularity time. We don't know what happens after that, but it is positive. Well, this should be proven. You are right. It's not obvious, you should prove. Is it important to create some line or some line? I think that this intersection point, yes, some line here, but I'm taking the first point, the first time where this line starts. Line of singularity. I'm saying that before t-sing here, in this region our method of characteristics perfectly works. And the solution is this one. A little bit implicit, but this can be uniquely solved. And so in principle if I am able to solve cubic polynomials which in principle can be done I can solve this and write u of tx equals something depending on t and x. But then there is t-sing and it's very interesting try to understand what happens after t-sing. But the point is that we don't have solution of solution. We do not have it. If we continue to I think that if we continue to our our lines so actually t-sing is sort of of this picture here. Nothing happens for x negative. So now, this is not the right place to continue the analysis of singular solutions to Berger's equation which is by the way very interesting. Unfortunately we cannot do this here. But let us give you just another viewpoint of the same problem. So this is our u bar. And let us look to our equation which says that u t if everything is smooth so if this is c1 u is c1 this is continuous and so on so we can take the product because you see assume that you have a singularity and assume that this singularity means that u jumps becomes discontinuous because singularity should be defined what it is. But assume that for us now a singularity means that u creates a jump. Then this is a big problem because ux is a measure so sort of I don't know if you know it but it is called the delta Dirac delta and the measure cannot be multiplied by this continuous function. This cannot be done in general. So it is not easy at all obvious how to interpret this product measure times this continuous function. When you will study measure theory probably you have studied some measure theory then you have learned how to integrate a continuous function maybe it comes apart, I don't know but continuous function with respect to the measure this you can do but the test must be continuous. Now what does it mean to integrate this continuous function with respect to the derivative because the derivative is a measure is not clear and indeed maybe one more natural way to write it is this so that at least this is in conservation low form and we can integrate by parts as I have already tried to explain maybe one time ago or two times ago but anyway so let us assume that everything is smooth so look at this this says that the horizontal velocity u t of the points of the graph of u solution assume that u is positive like in this case u bar is positive and assume that you can prove that if u bar is positive u also is positive actually it is immediate but you know that u is positive ok now the velocity in the horizontal direction depends on the height because there is u of x so this is the height is y, is the variable y if I am here I have a velocity if I am here I have another velocity because u is higher here positive and higher then it turns out that that points here higher points it turns out that our solution is something like this so the profile after some time is sort of this so this higher points move toward the right with faster than this and so like a wave exactly like a wave you have a wave and then as the c proceed in front of you the waves try to become vertical and so at the end what you see after the t-sing is a time where you are in this situation this is what happens at time t-sing in this case now you see what is the problem and what do you now is discontinuous after so I mean once you are in this situation then this is not part of the graph in the usual sense because this is vertical so this is actually is sort of discontinuous function now that you have now you want to let discontinuos so you don't know exactly what to do because our initial condition you bar up to now was c1 so we don't know exactly what to do what is the right notion of solution starting from this initial condition is not clear at all and we do not accept I think I don't know maybe you have this wave then maybe this is not acceptable this is not a function it's a multifunction it's not a function so maybe we do not accept this we accept something which are graphs so this is for us for some reason we do not accept this so it's not clear how to continue the solution of course from here there is a story starting from here it's a long story just to have some flavor on what happens at this thing now I would like to leave you at homework for the next so homework let so take b in Rn just to this is let you be the solution to ut that we know is just the first example interesting example of PDE this is now now t is larger than s u of s now I start at time s so this is just the linear transport equation with constant coefficient so we know everything just we start not at time equal to 0 but at time equal to s f is smooth given ok and define so homogeneous but with an initial condition this means the following what is dot u of sx is equal to fsx for any x is just to indicate a variable we know that this is a function of x maybe in some books if f is a function of two variable maybe in some books again this is a function of x so we could write f of s the important fact is that the notation is clear it is clear what we mean dependently of the notation maybe in some books on semi group theory parabolic equations one uses also this this kind of anyway now define u oh sorry v maybe I change name v of tx equal integral from 0 to t of u so let me denote this solution I need a symbol this solution to this I denote it as u t sx starting at time s at a generic larger time t t sx ds so let us superpose sum somehow the solution of this homogeneous problem starting however not from 0 but from f so I make a sort of superposition of solutions sort of some generalized sum the homework is then then v solves vt plus v grad v equal f and v at 0 equal 0 in 0 t times r t ok this is related to the so called duhamel principle or duhamel I don't know duhamel principle which is a principle which is very general actually not only valid for linear transport equation but also for oddies ordinary differential equation also for other kind of linear parabolic PDEs other equation in particular for the linear transport equation it says the following assume that I want to solve non-homogeneous problem with zero initial condition so non-homogeneous with zero initial condition the idea is that I can solve this as a superposition of what solutions you of homogeneous PD with f as initial condition at time s sort of general principle ok this is not a difficult exercise I don't think it's so difficult I mean you can simply differentiate with respect to t you have t here and t here so you have two contributions then you differentiate with respect to x of course you can differentiate inside the integral and then immediately you see that this at time 0 if you put t equal to 0 then this is 0 clearly this is not so difficult maybe we can do this remark at this point maybe we can do this remark so this is the homework ok maybe we can do this remark now let us consider ut plus b equal f let us consider this and u equal u bar then we have the expression of the solution we remember it so we have u of tx is u bar of x minus bt plus the integral between 0 and t f of s and then we have x plus s minus t ts this was the solution ok so this solution u which has right hand side and an initial condition is the sum of this plus this and this the first one just solves the homogeneous PD with the initial condition u bar so this is say the solution of the homogeneous problem and this what is this well this should be the solution of the non-homogeneous problem with 0 initial condition time is over now sorry


Thank you. Thank you ever. It takes a village to get a quorum. Yes. Alright, Carol Rowan and Jim Shuey, you put us over the over the mark. Thank you for that. Alright, so our um, and I will, when I'm done reading Monica, I'll keep track of folks again. I think Sandy and George Wysock look at this now we're going to be way over. We're just thank you everybody. Okay, so I'll try again. These are the words of Rudy Nemzer. He says you find them in congregations when you're lucky. You find them in other places too, I'm sure, though I mostly only know of them in the ecclesiastical varieties. These are the long haul people upon whose shoulders and pocketbooks and casseroles and daylight and nighttime hours a congregation is built and maintained even when the kitchens need to be cleaned and the cushions need restitching. They pay their pledge full and on time even if the music is too modern. They support every canvas, even though the sermons aren't always short. They care for the grounds and they come to the potluck. They teach religious education when there's no one else even though they miss going to service. Ask what they think of the minister or plans of the building renovation or the coral anthem or the program on Christmas Eve or the color of the classroom walls. They will simply reply individuals and fashions arrive and pass. This congregation, their community, will be here steady and hail for a long, long time. It will, of course it will, for long haul people bless a congregation with a very special blessing and they are the ones whom it gets to. So I think we have had the perfect example of long haul people this morning. Thank you for those who automatically sign on and come to parish meetings. Thank you to those who answered the call for quorum. It is really good to be together this morning. Thank you, Kelly. Thank you to everyone who joined and thank you to all who are helping run this Zoom meeting as we establish quorum and let everyone in from the waiting room. Just do a really quick agenda review. We do have several things to vote on. We will have a total of five votes for this meeting. We're approving the minutes from both the winter meeting in February and then our special parish meeting to, you know, to call our minister, Kelly AJ. So we have minutes from both those meetings and then we have candidates for both the FUS Foundation Board and the FUS Board and we have our budget to approve for the coming church year for the 2021-2022 year. And we have a very brief overview of a new team called the Healthy Congregation Team. I'm just going to introduce some of those concepts because it leads very nicely into the work that the relational covenant team has done in developing a new document for FUS, just about the agreements that we have with each other as congregation members. All right, we can move on to the rules or procedure. So this is yet again a virtual parish meeting held via Zoom. I hope we're getting a little bit better at this, but there's a lot of parts to work out every time. We do have quorum. Kelly, do we have a, do we have accounts? Do we officially have more than 71? Kelly or Monica? I may be able to do right now and I need to work in. I need to figure out who FUS ministerial surge team is. Is it Sandy? It's Chuck. Okay, thanks Chuck. Great. And do we have anyone joining only by phone? We'll need to know this for the for the votes. Is anyone just on phone that we'll need to make sure we get a voice vote for? We do not. Okay. All right, so voting. So again, you know, just I think I believe everyone here is a member as we as we've established quorum. We're going to use the same method for voting that we did for the for the special parish meeting. We've got we've got online forms all queued up for each vote. Please watch the chat. If it works for you to just click that link. It's a really quick way of tabulating all the votes virtually instantly. And it'll be a separate link for each vote. And if that doesn't work for you, we can also just we will also just pause to allow folks to vote by raising their hand on video as well, or by vote voice if that's needed. And for these votes, we're not we're not needing to get an exact count. We just need to know that we have a majority. So so hopefully that'll work just fine. And for voting or anything else, and for any of the other topics, please put any questions or comments in chat. And those will go just to the to the meeting host, and they will they will raise those. So any questions about the procedures as we move into our meeting. All right. So the first item on the agenda is to approve our minutes from the last two parish meetings. So the February winter meeting and the May 2nd special parish meeting. Are there any any discussion questions corrections from those minutes? So is there a is there a second to this motion? All right. Thank you, Nancy. All right. I'm going to paste the link to vote on this. If there's no other discussion, watch those votes come in. I just pasted the Google doc in again because someone came in after Terry pasted it. So if you can get in the chat, it's there again. Mark Nancy, are you struggling with that Google form? And I just wanted to mention again, you know, the form does let if you have two people on the same computer, it does let you just at the end just just click submit another response and the next person can vote. We've got got 47 responses, folks, a few minutes to figure out the form. June, I see your hand is raised. What's going on, June? We got it, by the way. Okay. Thanks, Nancy. Okay. Kathy, you're Kathy is the form not working for you? Right. The form doesn't work for me and I'm going to need to duck out early. So if it's legal, I'll vote yes in advance on all of the issues to be voted on. Okay. Thank you, Kathy. Okay. So I think, Terry, if you're okay with this, we can also take voice votes for anybody having difficulty with the form. I can track that. So this is the February, this is the minutes. And if there is anyone who needs to voice vote like Kathy just did, please unmute and let me know that and I will keep track of it and then I'll get that to John for the record. Yes. Both Alan and I need to voice vote. We're having problems getting and staying in. I saw that, Joy. Are you a yes for both? Yes. Thank you. Liza and I need to voice vote. We have an iPad and it's not allowing us to do your trick here. So we're saying yes. Yes for both of us. Thank you, Dick. I got Dick and Liza. And Sarah. I'm also voting yes. Can you hear me? Yep, I got it, Sarah. Thank you for that. Thank you. Marcy Bradley votes yes. Thank you, Marcy. Gotcha. Chuck evens and I vote yes. Tim Corden, I vote yes. Is he insanely the beers? Yes. I sent something at the bottom to Tom. I don't know whether that worked. Okay. I wrote it down and I'll get these, I'll get your names and your votes to John. Kelly, did you hear me? I did. Thank you, Tim. Did you get me, Kelly? I did. Thank you, Chuck. Everybody else okay? Terry, how are we doing on the go? Yeah, no, I think we're good. We've got all yeses in the online form and a couple of yeses except a couple of abstentions. So I think we have a clear majority. And I have a lot to add to that. 11 yeses. Perfect. All right. That is both a quorum and a clear majority. So thank you, everyone, for your patience with the voting. All right. Our next item is nominees for the FUS Board of Trustees and the Foundations Board of Trustees. I believe the Foundation members are up first. We can move to those slides. Yes, we have three candidates for the FUS Foundation Board. I hope you all have had a chance to take a look at the bios in the packet. We are fortunate to have folks with a great depth of both professional experience, related to money management, as well as a commitment to First Unitarian Society. We have two returning members. Connie and David are both returning to the board and Annette Helmer is joining. So are there any questions or discussion about the motion to approve these three members of the Foundation Board? I move that we accept them. Thank you, Rob. Is there a second? I think I heard Kathy along with several others, I think seconding. Kathy Luecker. I heard Rob first. Is there a second? Rob Savage and Kathy Luecker. Do we need any more seconds? Just if there are any questions just pausing if there are any questions or discussion and I will putting the link to the votes in the chat. I have I'm going to work on the assumption that the folks who voice voted for the minutes will also need to voice vote for the rest of our votes. So I will start by calling that list of names that just voted for the minutes while everybody else is using the Google form. Thank you, Kathy. I see your yes. Joy and Alan. Yes. Both. Thank you, Dick and Liza. Yes, for both. Thank you, Sarah, I think I saw you, Mal, the yes. I'm looking at you. Yes, for both. Thank you, Marcy. Marcy Bradley. Yes. Thank you, Chuck. Yes. Tim, Tim Corden. Yes. And Susie and Sandy DeBeers. Yes. Yes. Thank you, all. Is there anyone else who needs to vote by voice? That is harder to say than you might think. Thank you, Kelly, for doing that. And we will give the form just a couple more minutes. I think folks are still are still figuring out the online form. We've got about 15, sorry, about 53 responses. All yes. So, you know, we have a clear majority. We'll give folks just a few more minutes to vote. I might have accidentally voted twice, says Chuck Stone-Cyber. Okay. Thank you. All right. Does anyone, we do have a majority vote. Does anyone need more time? You can raise your hand if you're on video if you need more time. This is Ruth Arnold. We don't know how to move to the current vote. Oh, there's a new link for each vote. I will paste it again in chat. So if you still have a, if you still have a screen up with the previous vote, you can just close that and click there. There'll be a new link for each vote. Or just say yes and we'll, don't you? Yes. That too. Thank you. The waxlers need to vote yes on the second. Waxlers vote yes on the last. I thought you're relaying for someone else. Sorry. No, no, no. We voted on the first one and then the second one, we just couldn't get to the right link. All right. No problem. I got you, Bob and Lucy. So, Terry, that adds 15 yeses. All right. Great. That is unanimous for everyone who has voted. Thank you. So, there are 55 yes votes in the online form. All right. Moving on to the nominees for the board of trustees. We're delighted to have a member of the search committee move right on to joining the board for a three-year term. So Emily Cusick Putnam is a first candidate for the board of trustees and then also Ann Schaffer will be joining the board, a longtime member for a member of FUS for 21 years and has served in many roles. So, very happy to present these candidates. Is there, do we have a motion and second for these candidates to the board? I'm giving a enthusiastic for a second. Just Rob. Thank you, Rob. And if you needed a move, I'll do it. This is scale bless. Yeah, I think the nominations committee moves. I don't know. It's, it's a affirmation either way. And are there any questions on these, move to the vote. Any questions or discussion? All right. I will put that in the chat. Voice vote folks ready. I'll call your name again. Kathy Luker, I have you as a yes. I think you're still here. Right. Thank you, Kathy. Joy and Allen. Yes. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Dick and Liza. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Sarah. Yes. Marcy Bradley. Yes. Chuck. We're getting good at this. Yes. Tim Corden. Yes. Susie and Sandy. Yes. Yes. Dave and Ruth, were you able to vote or do you want to just do it by voice? I think we need to do this by voice. Dave and Ruth Arnold. Yes. Perfect. And how about Bob and Lucy? Yes. Yes. Thank you. Anybody else need to do it by voice? Since I don't think that I've been getting the way this is set up, I'll just do it by voice. Jim Jager votes yes. Thank you, Jim. It's great to see you. So, Terry, whatever your numbers are, you can add 16 yeses. All right. I think we have around 65 yeses. One abstention. I haven't heard or seen any no votes, so I think we have this motion passes. Terry, can we check one and Schaefer?  Did you get a chance to vote? Okay. Thank you. Thank you to everyone for being here and thank you to the candidates as well. I know we don't get to applaud when we're not in the same room with each other. These are thank you all for your commitments to these three year terms to both of our boards. And I think it is. Oh, no. Budget and multiple on this. So our budgets are next here. Yeah, thank you, Monica, for moving on to the budget slide. So last week we had our financial forum. I hope everyone got a chance to view the video, kind of introducing this year's budget. Then we had a live forum that was primarily small group discussion, you know, a chance to have some discussion about how our budget relates to our strategic priorities to our mission and values as a congregation. So, you know, so I hope everyone has had a chance to review the detail if you wish to as well as the FAQs that were included in the meeting materials. The FAQs are responses from the from the board and staff on the questions that came up in discussion. You know, a lot of good material there. So I encourage you to read that if you have not. Are there are there other, you know, so we have a motion to accept the budget as presented of there were no changes that came out of the financial forum or the board discussion all week. So are there any other questions or discussion as we before we move to vote on the budget? Yes, I would like to be able to see the budget again while we're voting. Thank you. I'll second the motion. Thank you. It's Elizabeth. I have a question. Go ahead, Laurie. Just a question. Wondering what the contract running time is, sorry if it was in the details and I missed it, for the nursery as well as for the parking agreements. I'll just say that I think we hold gold and I just am educating myself about when those things are not to be changed but to be reviewed and listened and thought about more. That's all. Yeah, I think I'll let Monica answer. I think the parking is continually under review and I know Monica is in close contact with the meeting house nursery school. Monica, would you like to? Sure. Yes, we renew the contract. We review it both with meeting house nursery school and our our renters, our parking renters on an annual basis right around this time. So I believe it's July first that the contract technically renews. Thank you. I have a question. I wasn't able to make it to the the meeting last week. So I just wanted to know exactly what the where did it go funds transfers or is that from the the foundation? No, so we have two different funds or accounts that we pull from. One is our unrestricted cash reserves and the other are our donor and board designated and restricted fund. So the vast majority of the fund transfers are from the cash reserve, the unrestricted cash reserve, and then about $7,000 of the donor restricted funds are transferred to the operating fund to support the appropriate programs. Thank you. Any other questions for a move to vote? I think it's $450,000 you have an unrestricted funds. Where did that money come from? That's a great question. So some of it is remnants from the insurance, the hail damage insurance claim that we had. What was it three or four years ago now? And the rest is so we received PPP funds. Those were all the paycheck protection program funds were all utilized to support the operating budget these last year and some change. The funds that we didn't use because we received PPP funds helped replenish that the unrestricted cash reserves. Thank you. Going to suggest we put the voting thing in the cat so that we don't spend time figuring out how to get to it after all the questions are answered. I can do that. I have a question of Monica. It's Lori Schwartz. I was wondering if we're eligible for any of the new funds that are coming down the road very soon or have already come out regarding nonprofits that may have experienced losses. Do you know are you referring to funds from the state, Dane County or the federal government? I wish I knew. I've heard some talk about some and I haven't seen any specifics. Yeah, numbers for nonprofits, there are accountants. They were really great about keeping us abreast of changes with the PPP. So those are federal funds. I haven't heard anything about another round of PPP funds coming. We received two different rounds of that, the second of which was far more selective. So I'm not anticipating any more federal funds, but we would take it if it was available. Would I have monitored state funds that have been available in the last year since the pandemic hadn't benefited nonprofits and especially not faith communities? But if members ever find opportunities for additional funds, please send them my way. Again, I haven't seen anything that pertains to us, but numbers for nonprofits will let us know. But of course, as members, you're always welcome to forward us opportunities. You prompted my memory. The information did come from is it Madison Community Foundation person who they've been directed to try to administer and it relates to nonprofits that might not have as directly benefited as much in the past and that I heard it in relation to Madison, Starlings and an organization because certainly we were not basic needs. Thus, I mentioned it because I'm not sure if a church was seen as basic needs either that this was expanding nonprofits who lost funds and could show the reason for that. And it was going to be much more simple to apply. And I heard it referenced in regards to Joe Parisi. So that makes me assume that it's county. Yeah, that's great. Madison Community Foundation, I'll be sure to take a peek. Thank you for that. All right, just just give one quick bit of tech support. We are switching back and forth to vote. You know, it does take you to another program when you vote. So if you need to get back to the Zoom meeting, do whatever you normally do to switch between programs on your tablet or computer. So just so you know, we are we are leaving the Zoom application when we're voting. And we do have the if for anyone who's ready to vote on the budget, we have the we have the link to that vote up now. Are there any other questions specifically about the approval of our 2021 2022 budget? And feel free to vote however you can. I have I'm receiving a few votes in the in the chat to the person texting me feel free to send your vote that way. And also, you know, Kelly will go through the voice. I can do it again. I see your green vest. Thank you for that. Joy and Allen. Yes, yes. Dick and Liza. Yes, yes. I love the yes, yes. Okay, Sarah. Yes, yes. Thank you, Marcy. Yes. Chuck. Chuck Stone Cypher. You're still here. No, I'm sorry. Chuck Evenson. You're still here. All right, we'll come back to you. Chuck Evenson. Tim Corden. Yes. Susie and Sandy. Yes, yes. Dave and Ruth. There you are. Dave and Ruth. You want to unmute. There we go. I'll do the ask to unmute. Okay. And thank you, Liz. Kelly. So yeah, this is Janice Kordes. I need to voice vote. Perfect. Are you a yes. Yes. All right. Jim Jaeger. Yes. Thanks, Jim. Bob and Lucy. We did chat. You did chat. Okay. You were both a yes. Yes. All right. Dave and Ruth, they see you unmuted. Yes. Yes. Thanks. And then Chuck Evenson, I'm looking at you. If you're having trouble unmuting, you can shake your head or something at me. I already voted on the form, Kelly. I'm sorry. You did the form. Perfect. All right. All right. So we have, I think we have, I'm seeing all yeses, hearing all yeses. We have 57 responses, one, one extension in the online form. I think a couple others have voted via chat. Other meeting hosts, I think we had a few folks voting via chat. All right. So I think we have a, again, a clear majority. Thank you, everyone, for your patience and voting. It is an important vote. So you want to make sure we have everything recorded. All right. So I think we can move. So the, we have an approved budget for next year. And thank you to all who worked on this as well. I know, you know, we're doing, this is the end of a long process. So thank you to all of the staff and finance committee and everyone who participated in this process. Yes. Yay. Yay to getting through a pandemic also. This is, you know, we are thinking about many worst case scenarios a year and a half ago. And we've gotten, gotten through this very well. So thank you to everyone. All right. You can just move on to the next slide here. Just want to do a very, very brief, just kind of introduction to, to a team that will be new for FUS. This is just so the Healthy Congregation team. It's a new group that the, the board just adopted a charge to form this team at our last board meeting just, just last Wednesday. And it, this team will have, we're introducing it now because it relates very closely to the relational covenant work that they're going to spend the remainder of the meeting discussing today. And the Healthy Congregation team will, will have a broad remit to, you know, to educate and to, and to consult on a wide variety of issues related to communication in general, and specifically to, you know, to any conflict that, that comes up between individuals or groups in the Congregation, you know, to be sure that we're, you know, addressing issues and conflict in a way that's aligned to our values as you use and, and in line with the, you know, the, the principles that we're going to discuss later in the, in the relational covenant. So this, this small team will report to the executive team. So the ministers and Monica's executive director and the board president and president-elect. And it, one other, one other thing that the executive team as a whole will do, they'll, you know, also, also just help, help direct questions, especially if there's any kind of conflict involved, but questions, issues to help direct them to the right place, whether that's a direct conversation, you know, within a individual group or, or directing things either to the board, if it's policy related, or to the appropriate staff member or minister, if it's about an area of, it's within their, their program area, or to raise it further, if there is a significant concern that needs to have broader discussion within the congregation. It's another, it'll be a separate group beyond the board and beyond our existing program ministry teams to, you know, to help, help keep those conversations going and then to, and help the conversations happen in any, any healthy way. And I know this is, so Kelly, would you like to add anything to, to this just as, it was way of an introduction and it's just, it was just a brief overview, but sorry. What? Wait, what? Um, no, I think Terry's overview view is great. The one question that I've had from folks about this, so in case anybody's wondering, some of you have served on a committee on ministry in the past, which when we switched to policy governance became ministerial relations team.  I don't just say eight years ago or so. And so in thinking about how to move forward with that, Kelly and I both really appreciate this switch at the moment to a healthy congregation team instead of us trying to recreate a committee on ministry and figure out what is the work of that. This feels like the, the work that needs to be held right now. So know that the Kelly's are, are very much in favor of this team. And I'm trying to think of an example, I had a question come in in the chat, some examples of, of when the team would step in. I'd say, well, one, one very general issue, and you without getting really precise about content, you know, I think one thing we, we think a lot about and talk a lot about as a congregation, certainly as a board is, is about transparency. So if, you know, an individual has or group or whoever, you know, has a conversation about how was this decision made?  Or asking for, you know, maybe asking for kind of behind the scenes information, maybe asking for something more detailed in terms of, you know, budget decisions or, you know, asking for some kind of documentation. You know, this, this team would, you know, kind of help hold that conversation.  Or maybe just a matter of education like here's where you get that information. Here, here's where that, that decision was made. Here's the background. Or in some cases, you know, I'm thinking about some of the listening sessions that the board has had about some of the bigger decisions about like the shape that the interim period took. You know, this could be another group who can help communicate and hold opportunities for discussion. If there are areas where there's, where there is some conflict or question and can help hold those conversations, you know, help be very hands-on without it necessarily always having to be the board or a minister or an individual staff member. It's, you know, it's a group that's going to be, you know, again, they're very closely connected to the board through the president, president-elect, and through the ministers and staff, you know, to have a just another group to help decide, okay, here's something we need to address. You know, what's the best way? Do we need to, you know, hold very public discussions? Do we need to have just follow-up conversations with the individual? It's just kind of a way of opening up that conversation so it's not someone just talking to a minister, just talking to the board president.  All right. And just just words of support in the chat. Thank you. Thank you for those. So I'm hoping, I've been hoping that we would have something like this to support our congregation. And I would say, so there's another piece to this as well that's still under development, specifically for the board. You know, one of the goals of having this team is to direct things to the board for discussion that are specifically about policy. And we're building out, we have a couple examples from other congregations where, you know, the governance team and board are going to be working on kind of formalizing that process. So, you know, so it's, if something is a board issue, we can know, have a kind of repeatable process for how that discussion would go, for how that potential change to policy or response to the request would go. And I don't want to take up too much time since we want to get to the relational covenant, but are there, are there other questions on the, or comments on the, on the healthy congregation team? Terry, could you repeat how that's selected and the makeup of it? I'm sorry. Well, so that is part of the detailed charge. If anyone, we will communicate that out more broadly. So there's a whole list of qualifications. It's, you know, basically someone who's been a member of the congregation for a while, not currently on the board, that sort of thing. You know, again, the idea is to kind of, you know, spread this discussion amongst multiple people and groups. So there's, you know, so there's increased transparency. Anyone interested in the details, feel free to, you know, to email me. And again, we'll communicate this more broadly. This was primarily just some context. So, you know, this is, this is in the works as we, as we discussed the relational covenant. How large do you expect the, this group to be, Terry? Good question. I'm not sure if it's in the charge. I, just a minute, I might be in here. I don't think we set a size. So again, you know, this was just, this charge was just adopted. So I think it's as large as it needs to be. I would imagine fairly small, you know, kind of like our, you know, personnel and finance committees, you know, they tend to be relatively small, maybe three to five people or something like that. Okay. Thanks. All right. Any other questions or comments? Okay. So yeah, next topic. I'm very happy to have members of the relational covenant team who did the work. Oh, Nancy had her hand. Oh, sorry. Sorry. Go ahead. I think this question is to you, Kelly, because I guess I had missed the fact that the ministerial committee had ceased to exist. And my understanding of what it was doesn't seem to be related to a healthy, healthy congregation committee, like it was described here. So why do you and Kelly feel that this is where we need to be going and do you need a ministerial committee like you used to have? Great question. Thanks, Nancy. So part of the ministerial relations team was folks who had a relationship to support the called ministers so that if a problem arose in the congregation, there was a group ready to help us sort through that. That piece we see being with this healthy congregations team, folks who have a pulse on what's happening within the congregation, watching for issues that might be bubbling up. Kelly and I feel like we're going to be getting our support with our clergy coach. We'll be working with a clergy coach, both to develop our relationship, but then also to be that supportive place to help us sort through not just things between us, but with us and the congregation as well. So we feel like we're going to be able to get that support piece in a different way. And we're totally going to reassess this at the end of our first year. Thank you. Yeah. And I think it's really consistent in, you know, this approach is really consistent in the way that we've been assessing our ministry in general, where it's not about ministers as such, but it's about ministry. It's about how does everything fit together and, you know, yes, there are staff and ministers, but we're all involved in that.  You know, is this about a called minister or is this about another area of the congregation? That definitely sounds like a step forward. Thank you. All right. So we're happy to have the members of the small team who developed our relational covenant talk a little bit about their process and introduce that covenant to us. And just to queue this up, you know, we will vote on adopting the covenant in this meeting. And so we want to hear more about the process of its development. And then following the vote, you know, if, depending on how we're doing on time, you know, we had planned some small group discussion as well. So if there's still time left, we could, we will, you know, briefly break into breakout groups for a little bit of reflection on the, the principles in the covenant. So go ahead. I think we have at least one speaker. So handed off to whoever on the team is, is going to introduce this. Yeah, I think I was going to start. But because you've got the, that's better. Thank you. I've got, I've got a cheat sheet on my desktop and I couldn't get to it just so that I cover everything. We were going to tell you basically how, how we went about it and why, why it's being done. This is a written document to describe community expectations and serve as a blueprint for the community that's FUS. We really haven't had anything like that. Rather than a set of laws or rules, it's an ideal to which we aspire. And it's a statement that will hopefully be regularly used for individual and group self, self reflection and could be used as a replacement or in conjunction with the individual group specific covenants that people have been generating for each group. And it answers the questions, what is FUS now? Who are we as a community? And what do we value so that anybody coming in to, to the community could actually look at this covenant and see what sort of a people we are. It's planned to be adaptable over time and it's expected to be reviewed regularly to make sure that it still reflects the reality that is the changing scenario. The systems to implement the review are still being created, which you just heard about. It's still in flux, so nobody quite knows exactly how that's going to work. So this is only the start of the journey, but this is the step towards creating healthy congregation. And it's a way to bring the bond of union into action. We've had the bond of union forever. And really, there's no way, or it's just sort of sitting there up on the window and nobody ever really looks at it. So this is a way to actually bring it into reality. And it will act as a guide for congregational expectations and behaviors and gives an active voice and is a description for the use of healthy interpersonal practices. We expect that it will be used frequently before the congregation often. So it becomes part of who we are. So that might be in worship, small groups, governance groups like Board of Trustees, ministry teams. So it's anticipated that they'll be shared and discussed with new and prospective members. So the new UU congregation, it would be brought, I mean, new UU group, that would be introduced to them initially. And the goal is to have it become second nature and part of the congregation's self-image, understanding and identity. So that, you know, this is how we treat how we treat each other here. We, and you just heard from the Board that the healthy congregation team has already been approved. So that's part of it. And this is sort of the broad underlying blueprint for it. And I think Anne was going to tell you how they actually went about doing it. I hope Anne Schaefer is able to unmute. I know she was having some connectivity issues. So Anne, if you're here. Can you hear me now? Yes. Okay, good. Well, I will tell you the process that we went through. And the first thing, as you see on the sheet, is that we met to try to understand what is this covenant and why would we work on it? And Roger gave some background about his work with relational covenants in Appleton. And then we did research on other congregations that had relational covenants. And at that point, it became very clear to us, although these other covenants were very good, that we wanted to have one that specifically reflected our congregation. So in that end, we did congregational listening sessions at two different times to just gather your thoughts, desires, wishes, hopes and dreams for a relational covenant. So then we had all of this kind of stuff. And then Ava Rochester and I brought it together into the first draft of the document, which was a very daunting task, but very, very stimulating and fun.  And we paid particular attention to listening to our congregation. We didn't want just a generic document, but we wanted it to be ours and in our words. After we did that, we then we had two listening sessions to review the first draft and we gathered responses and reactions to that. And we also had it in the red floors for people to write to us, which a number of people did of their reactions to the first draft. Then Roz wonderfully pulled together the editing and the wordsmithing of the final draft to bring you to what you have today in front of you to vote on. Thank you, Anne and Roz. Any questions for the team specifically about the process or the document? And again, the full document is in the meeting materials. I encourage you to read it carefully if you haven't already. I do appreciate how collaborative this process was. We got to hear in our board meeting about the details of the development and it was so glad that so many people were involved in the listening sessions. Again, like Anne said, it's helpful if it's really ours. It can change over time. It's intended to change over time, but it's most meaningful if it resonates with our members here, our community here. And I wanted to say just an interest of time. It took us a while to get going today. I think we will just have conversation here. I think it's getting a little bit too late for breakout rooms. It's meant to be a living document and used widely, so there will be many opportunities to discuss. So let's just do a large group conversation here. I've got a question in the chat for the team. What surprised you most or what was most impactful to you in developing this? One of the things for me was, can you hear me? Yes. Okay. One of the things for me was how strongly people felt that they wanted to have positivity and joy in the document. That word in particular, joy, really resonated with people. So that was a happy surprise. I was really happy to hear, as we talked about this, people got excited about the fact that we finally had something that actually said who we are and that you could explain to people who walked in the door. So that was my take out. Hi, this is Becky. I was able to participate in the input sessions and just really appreciated how open the group, the planning group was to our comments and our ideas. I mean, none of us are exactly certain how to word such a document, but we had some really rich conversations, which are really valuable. Yes, we really did, Becky, that your input and that was really positive and influenced the document. I think we have a raised hand, Laurie, if you want to unmute. Yeah. I think Becky, I'll echo that. I felt this group listened and engaged very meaningfully in tough conversations. I just want to give a very specific example briefly. There are people that have left our church over and named the issue. For me, that often my struggle is race, but I've seen other people leave. How do we deal with harm and not making the victims of harm be the people educating others about that? The conversation made me feel included in this committee and the process as opposed to excluded. And one of the concepts that we need to avoid as a society of white supremacy is avoiding conflict and they didn't avoid conflict. They engaged people in meaningful conversation and the depth of that keeps drawing me personally in more to this community. And I want to recognize that, appreciate it and say that I hope that that's how we continue to engage each other. Thank you. Thank you, Laurie. Just another question from the chat. What influence do you think the creation of this during a pandemic has? I think the pandemic, my opinion is that the pandemic made us want to come back together in a better way than we had been before. Yeah, I would reiterate that. I think it gave time for self-reflection in a way and people thinking about what they really value about this community. I would just add that I think it gave us a pause that we needed to have a thorough reflection about the way we are with each other when we are in person. That's right. And the fact that we're in transition as well with the two Kellys, I think it really is an ideal time to do something like this. The pandemic gave us space to do it. Well, I think we did it well. I want to express appreciation for the directness of the language and the clarity of expression that's reflected in the in the relational covenant as presented. I think it's very clear and doesn't lead to much room for adverse interpretation. And I really appreciate the simplicity of the language. I have one suggestion. We can't see the people who are speaking except for Roz and Ann. So if you could please say your name before you make your statement, that would be lovely. I think we're going to go to speaker view also so we can see people as they speak. Well, one thing I would say about the language is one of the reasons that it's so clear and precise is my co-conspirator Eva Rochester.  She just like, no, no, that's pretentious, that's this, that's this. And so I want to put a shout out to Eva for the language that we have. I have two comments. One is I want to be sure that people know that the other two people on the team that drafted this are the two youth members of the board of directors. And so they are really, really smart, no-nonsense young women. So they were absolutely a wonderful contribution. The other thing that struck me about this is I actually saw my words, my like my own words, and I saw other people's words. The group made a point of saying, this is actually our document. This is First Unitarian Society's document. It's not a boilerplate that we got from somebody. It is actually our words. And I could read in it words that I had heard from in the meetings that I attended. So they did an incredible job of really truly making it our document. And then the fact that it can, it's not casting concrete. You know, it's not a plaque that's going to go on the wall. It really is something that will be reviewed periodically as needed. That's right. Thanks for putting that so eloquently about the use of the language, Lorna, because as you said, it would take us 20 minutes to write a covenant if we wanted to just have basic generic covenant. And that's not what we wanted. So we took the time to hear from you. And I hope that we did listen and your words say to me that we did manage to hear some of the people that we really wanted to hear from. And it was really, it was a privilege to work with the younger members of the congregation too, because so often they get, excuse me, they get left behind. And they're not consulted with when we do things like that. And it was a total pleasure to work with them. Yes. And I would say, you know, if it was very nice to discuss this at the board meeting, you know, this has been such a collaborative process that we did, we did not feel the need to dive into, to changing words on the page. And we really just had a very nice discussion about, about the process and hearing, you know, hearing how much input there had been. And when the board, you know, voted to bring this forward to the congregation. And I thank you to, you know, to everyone who's participated in this, to everyone who attended those sessions. In the interest of time, I do, do want to bring this forward for a vote. If Monica, if you could share the, the motion slide, if, if someone from the team would like to, to make the formal motion to bring this for a congregational vote. I'll make a motion to bring it to a vote. I'm so happy to do it. Thank you. I'll second that. Thank you, Becky. All right. Thank you, Anne and Becky. I'm going to, I'm going to put the link to vote in the chat and we will of course call for those voice votes as well. Well, I would like to have a discussion before I vote. Okay. I have, I, I think it's a lovely document. I like it very much. My only question is why, under the very first category, oh, good. Now I can see it again. I wasn't, so the spirit with which we approach one another, the very first bullet is make a choice to remain in relationship in good faith over and over again, even as we disappoint. I was thinking that we don't want disappoint as the first bullet, that maybe we want to put that later in that list and assume and remember that all have the best interest that congregation at heart might maybe come first. That's my only, you know, that's a really small little tweak and not very, it's not even a criticism. It's just that my feeling is that we want to elicit people's relationality in a way that is positive first and then saying, well, of course, we're going to disappoint, you know, because we know we're all human. Thanks. Just let the committee respond. Just wanted to bring forward something we discussed in the board that puts a little bit of different framework, you know, as opposed to positive or negative, that it puts front and center that this is aspirational. We're not saying this is how any one of us could possibly, you know, relate to one another all the time. We know there is disappointment inherent in relationships and in communities. So putting that forward as the context, you know, I thought may hear that, you know, that this is something we aspire to. But I'll let the committee respond to that. We want to say what our aspiration is first before we say that, of course, it is an aspiration. That's my feeling was that let's say something that is the ideal first, you know, that we aspire to and then say, of course, we're never going to reach that ideal. And this is not a big deal. You know, if we decide to leave it this way, I understand why the committee might want to have it that way. I would love to hear what Ross and Anne have to say to that. Yeah, this particular point was one that was actually taken down verbatim from a listening session. And so it's I think it's a good example of the sort of genuine language from our congregation where it is in the order is very positive to me. It doesn't say that it's we are all about disappointment. I don't think it says that at all. I think it mentions that in our relationships, we do disappoint, but we stay in. And to me, that's the most positive. I would like to add the comment that I appreciate the forwardness of choice. I think the choice adds an initiative and a positiveness. Oh, yeah. Okay. Just a comment from the chat, even as we disappoint and are disappointed, suggestion to add those additional words and are disappointed. Just procedurally for this discussion here, I would say, again, I mean, it's intended to be a living document. And so anything we vote on, we, of course, can vote to accept amendments here. Again, had our time been managed a little bit differently, we were going to break out into discussions. But this is a very much a forward looking document. It will it will not be the last opportunity to look at the individual words. But so if there is something that someone wants to raise that you think is important enough that we want to amend and vote on that, if it's important enough that you want to take the time to do that, we can we can do so. I'm not sure if we would need to vote to amend at this point. But I would ask everyone to, you know, to just kind of prioritize, you know, if there are other discussions that are comments, great, but let's, let's, if you could state your, you know, state any requests, like if you do have a an official request that you would like us to change wording before we vote, let's let's put it in that framework. And again, I'd ask just, you know, from the I think from the board, from my understanding of the purpose of the document, and from the, you know, the spirit with which the board has brought this forward, you know, we're kind of voting on the the document as a whole the spirit of the document. So, you know, if there are changes, you know, let's please prioritize something that's significant enough that really changes the meaning of the whole. And I see at least one raised hand. Gail, did you have something? Yes, I would suggest we approve this as is because attempting to rewrite this in a Zoom meeting is going to take hours. And it's it's imperfect just like it says we will always be so let's say this is good enough for now. And if we choose to reorder the points in section one a year from now, maybe we can do it in person. So I move I move we accepted at somebody already moved, never mind. Well, that that's why I actually already voted yes, because I think it's the document is good as is it could always be changed, but we should move forward. But that's just my opinion. I second the motion. Can we have a motion on the floor that's already had us, though we could probably proceed with the vote, we're just having some discussion. Yes, I have a question. I've got a question. I don't know. Yeah, I'm moving. What is the relationship supposed to be between this covenant and the continuing bond of union? The reason I asked that is because I know for many of the older members of the congregation, the bond of union is very important to them. I've conversations I've had over the years. So is there is this a planting it? Is this just in addition to what is any thought given to that? This does not replace the bond of union. This is a supplemented addition. And I would say the healthy congregation charge as it exists right now says that, you know, that team will continually renew this and, you know, thinking at least a biannual review. But, you know, it's certainly a guiding document for that team, as well as other groups in the congregation. So, you know, it's a living document. And again, the current motion on the floor, whenever we're ready to vote, the current motion is to accept the draft as presented by the team. So if there are any motions that you feel are important enough to amend, we could address that. Otherwise, we can proceed to vote on the document as presented. Okay. And Terry, I think you already put the link in the chat. Not yet. Not this one. Hang on. Got it in there. Motion number. You have it in there. Oh, do I? Okay. You do. I think some of them have already voted. So I'm going to move into the voice vote. Joy and Allen. Yes. Yes, yes. Dick and Liza. Yes, yes. Sarah Stack. Oh, there I see you shaking your head. Thank you. Yes. Marcy. Marcy Bradley is still here. Okay. I'll take a look for him. I'm going to keep going. Tim Corden. Yes. Susie and Sandy. Yes. Yes. Dave and Ruth. Dave and Ruth may have... Oh, there you are. I see you. Are you a yes? You can just shake your heads, too. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Bob and Lucy. I don't see Bob and Lucy. Jim Jaeger. Jim, I see you, but we can't add Janice. Yes. Okay. I just unmuted again. If you need that, vote remains yes. Thanks, Jim. Terry, I have 15 yeses to add to your number. All right. And we have 51 responses that is... We have 49 yeses, two abstentions, and one no. I believe we have a majority vote. Thank you again to everyone who worked on this. And please watch for more opportunities to discuss this. This is just the beginning of beginning to use this document. Thank you. All right. So for our closing, I'm going to mute you. You'll have to unmute yourself in a minute. But for our closing today, we need to say a very special thank you. And that is to our outgoing president, Terry Pepper. So Terry came into this position of President-Elect during the first year of our interim process. Terry has served as President-Elect and then President of the congregation throughout the entire interim process. You would need a special someone to sign up for this job to be willing to help lead a congregation through a time of turmoil and transition, signing up for honestly, who knows what. And fortunately for us, Terry is fascinated by religion, by community, by how our congregation runs, and what would make it even better. In one of my first conversations with Terry, she said, oh, I love church governance. It's fascinating. I learn more all the time. Terry, I will never understand this. And I know that you were exactly the person we needed for this time. Thank you for your patience, your diligence, your persistence, your imagination, your belief in who we could be together. You've been creative and resilient. You have brought us together amidst differences in opinions and ideas of how to move forward. You have created countless agendas and power points. You have sat through hundreds of hours of meetings in person and in Zoom. You have helped hold it all together with humor and grace. And we will be forever grateful for your leadership over the past three years. You have truly made all the difference. Thank you, Kelly. And thank you for also continuing to laugh at my lone governance, too. Otherwise, it'd be way too serious. Thank you. And thank you for that list of things. And especially as the incoming nominating chair, I just really want everyone to know in all earnestness that this has been a rewarding experience for me as well. Yes, you're kind of signing up for a long list of tasks. But I've just gained so much more appreciation for all the people I've gotten to know better. You do interact with a lot of members of the FUS community, as board president, and such an appreciation for the staff as well. I know there are a lot of things that folks sometime assume the board is doing that staff and ministers are really supporting us and holding the space for so many things that we do here. And lastly, especially as we're in the final weeks here, I'm so excited to watch Alyssa Ryan Joy begin her role as president here. She has such a depth of experience in being member of this community. And even from a professional life, she brings a lot of language around inclusion and diversity. And I'm so excited for everything she's going to bring to this role as we as we enter this next year with our new ministry team. So and thank you. Thank you. Also, it's been a even through this transition through the pandemic, the chance to work so closely with Doug and Roger as well. They've been, it's been a great experience. So so thank you for those words. Thank you. So everybody knows we will be gifting Terry. We will be showering with her, her with gifts for both Terry and her long suffering. What is what is Rachel called herself Flofus or first lady first lady. So we're going to shower her and our Flofus in a in soon in a in a time soon. So know that that'll be happening on behalf of all of you. Thank you, Kelly. Thanks, everybody. That's our closing. Everybody enjoy this beautiful day. Thank you. Thank you for joining the meeting. Thanks for being here today.


Mr. Konstantio, the ECBS today published the May 2017 Financial Stability Review. What are the key risks to your area of financial stability? Well, you know, the world economy and the European economy are growing stronger and that's good also for financial stability. Nevertheless, of course there are always risks and the risks are resulting from the fact that since September last year the prospects of higher growth and in the end medium term higher inflation led to a big change in financial markets. The investors started to buy more shares and less bonds which led then to the increase of price of shares which in some parts of the world, not Europe, are already overstretched and bonds saw their prices go down and that's the main risk that we highlight in our financial stability review because this decrease in the price of bonds implies losses for the institutions and segments of the financial system that are the holders of such bonds. At the same time, this decrease in the price of bonds means an increase in market interest rates and that's another element of the risk. The second risk is connected with the still low profitability of banks in the Euro area as a result of still low nominal growth and some structural issues that we face. Third risk has to do with the further stress resulting from the burden of servicing the debt as a result of the higher market interest rates and that puts challenges to a debt sustainability both to the public sector and to the private sector, the agents that are more heavily indebted. And finally, we highlight a risk that has subsided which is the liquidity risk in the non-bank financial part of the financial system because there is a growing mismatch between the maturities of assets and the maturities of liabilities. The next two years of Brexit negotiations will be marked by a lot of uncertainty.  Well, the point is that of course Brexit is very significant for the UK but in view of the relative size it's much less meaningful for the rest of the EU. For instance, the rest of the EU just exports to the UK 4% of total GDP and trade is not going to disappear with Brexit. Then if we look to financing coming out of London for the firms in the rest of the EU we see that total bank financing coming out of London represents only 1-2% of total external financing of the economic agents in the rest of the EU. And many of the banks that are providing such financing out of London are banks that belong to countries in the continent and which means that they can easily substitute the financing that they are now providing out of London from their headquarters in the continent. And at the same time we already see that even third country institutions that operate in London are also starting to relocate to the continent. So this relocation will continue. Regarding capital markets in London where there are significant capital markets the issuance of debt or equities in London by firms of the rest of the EU represents only 10% of the total issuance of debt and equities of such firms which again is absorbable it will not disappear altogether firms will continue to issue in London as they issue in New York of course there will be a reduction that can easily be absorbed in the rest of the EU. And that's by the way why it is very important to quickly develop the project of the capital markets union because it becomes more necessary with Brexit. And indeed these is something that look all together to all the factors that I mentioned means that Brexit can really not harm significantly the ongoing recovery in the Euro area. Thank you.


Welcome to Burns Library, the Special Collections Library at Boston College. Today I'll be showing you how to analyze historical map, looking at both the physical features on the map as well as its content. Think about the message a map is conveying and how it could be useful to your research. But remember, if you have questions or want to find out more about maps available at Burns Library, you can always contact us for help. Let's start with this map. It looks like this map has a title box, so I'm going to start there. This is Africa described, the manage of their habits and buildings newly done in English by IS, are to be sold by the Bassett and Fleet Street and Richard Chiswell in St. Paul's Churchyard. This tells me the title and the location of the shops, which makes me think this was created in London. I don't see any dates or full author name besides IS, but I could try to use the shop names to come up with tentative date of when they were active. However, I know this map is from Boston College, so I'm going to look it up in the library database to see what metadata is associated with this map that can tell me more. If this map was part of an online database, like the David Rumsey map collection, I'd check there to see if they have included more information on the map. So the database entry for the map has more details that can help. It looks like they think this map is from 1676 and was by John Speed. So likely the IS I saw is really a JS. It was engraved by Abraham Goose, who was also listed at the very bottom of the map. The map itself is just loose, but looking at the database entry, it was originally included in a book called Theater of the Empire of Great Britain, together with a prospect of the most famous part of the world by John Speed, that was published in 1676. I bet that's where they got the date for this map then. That book title also gives me some context of the purpose of the map that I can keep in mind as I look at it further. Based on the title and the publication place, I'm already gonna guess it from an English perspective. The illustrations around the map definitely reinforce the idea that this isn't from an African perspective. And if I look at the place names used, they also show a very English perspective. The Ottoman Empire is not mentioned here at all. The map is mostly noting political boundaries, though once again, I'm questioning the names and boundaries used, which definitely have a bias. The Islet of Tunis is just part of Barbary on here. And major landforms, mountains and bodies of water. The illustrations throughout the map and around the border tell me this is meant to be entertaining. So likely an illustration in the so-called exotic places far away from the British Empire. The map is centered on the continent of Africa. No legend is given with the projection and scale, though that could have been in this rounded book text. However, that does reinforce the idea that this isn't a map for actual navigation or strict accuracy. I keep noticing the illustrations on the map. The animals are really interesting. It's emphasizing, look at these exotic creatures you might find here, rather than anything about the navigation, natural resources, political or military importance or culture of the areas. It also really emphasizes names, saying not only what they consider the current place names, but also occasionally the older place names. The outer border attempts to depict various people to live within Africa. I don't have enough historical or cultural knowledge to know how accurately any of these figures are depicted. However, this goes along with the animals and the emphasis of the strange and alien to British readers from the map. The peoples, animals, even the likely inaccurate cities at the top of the map are all supposed to allow British readers to armchair travel and wonder if one strange and daring place to Africa might be. I'd expect a very, very different emphasis if this was created by someone who actually lived here and wanted to get around, even to understand the political complexities of the area. Political boundaries for one, where do each of these names of the maps start and stop? Natural resources, if I was a trading company or an empire of the time who was interested in whether or not I wanted to start trading or invading the area, this map doesn't tell me anything about what I might find. Wind currents and other features that might help me sail to Africa or navigate the rivers are all missing. As I keep on mentioning with the names, I'm deeply suspicious if these names are what the people who live in these areas call their cities and countries. Putting this all together then, I can say this is a British map of Africa made for presumably British audience who are just generally curious about the world beyond Great Britain. It emphasizes curiosity and stereotypes over actual practical information about the political or geographical features of the area. While I'm slightly doubtful about its accuracy at portraying how the peoples of nations in Africa describe and organize themselves, it is really helpful and research projects for how the British were seeing and describing the area in the 1670s. I could compare this with other maps from non-British map makers or my general historical knowledge of the area to discuss the differences. I could pair this map with the type of British travel accounts the map was once a part of to discuss British fascinations or lack thereof with the Ottoman Empire and the cultures within it. Or I could try to find other British maps to the Ottoman Empire during this time period to think about whether they were all for the general public or if other types of maps and questions existed in the British public about this region. This map, like most maps, has a lot of different research potentials in areas of further exploration.


How to get paid while you wait? How to get paid while you wait for your entry? How to get paid not to chase that's what we're talking about right now. So earlier I made a video about Palantir being a little bit on the high side based on classic valuation methods and Buying now is not a great entry At least according to my valuation sheets. So what do you do and This is a strategy that I use. I'm sure other people do it too, but it's a cash secured put or Getting paid to wait at lower prices. So Earlier this week I put out a video saying that Palantir is probably a good deal below Six or seven dollars and I'll show you my valuation sheet in a second, but if it's a good deal at six it's Probably like a Wholesale, it's a wholesale price is six retail price is where it is right now. That's another way to look at it But while you're waiting if you're not going to pay retail, you're not going to jump in and buy, you know With the highest price you can You know, you might be waiting and getting money market money market is now respectable It's like four to five percent Right for a year you park your money four to five percent Warren Buffett's always trying to beat treasuries and if you can't he'll just buy treasuries It's essentially money market. Let me get the valuation sheet. I keep a valuation sheet on a multitude of stocks and then I have Some entry prices That would be sweet entry prices if I could get them So if we look at Palantir They're supposed to grow around 20% they earn 21 cents 26 the next year you grow that out you get a future price my future price right now is saying $58 in a decade and Then you grow it back to get a good deal if I could get it at 585 That's a 10-bagger price. Okay, I keep track of a bunch of them. So I know now we can use that data To trade options, so I'm gonna get my Option chain out. I've got Palantir plugged in. I'm gonna look for simplicity at the Jan 2024 strikes and I'm gonna look at that one six the six option Now it doesn't pay a lot But because I already determined for my worksheet that if I could get Palantir at six bucks and hold it for a decade I already know that Mathematically if it grows as it's expected, I'm gonna make between 22 and 26 percent And that's what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to invest for the long run and worst case I know my growth at a lower price. I'm comfortable getting assigned at six I want to get Palantir at six. So I if I look at this put I shop it right now It's the equivalent of earning 21.5% for 244 days The capital required It's only about a hundred bucks to collect 21 at six. So they'll pay me 21 cents If I sell this put if I write this put at six Till Jan 2024. I'm on the hook. I have to buy it if it goes down there if I get assigned 21 cents and if it never goes down again I'll make 21% return on my capital. Okay, so let's go back to Palantir and I don't know we'll do we'll do that chart Let's do a decade if my math says hey one day it'll be 50 bucks in In the next decade and I get to buy it at six then I'll make ten times my money and that ends up being about 25% annualized over a decade if I sell this put I'll get 21% Anyway, we're on that money. It's a hundred dollars margin So you see what I'm trying to do if I'm trying to get six I don't want to pay 11 so I'm gonna wait But it doesn't mean I don't have to participate in the price action so I can go sell a put This is why I love valuation If I didn't have valuation It would be a lot harder to pick my strikes. It would be just I mean I guess technically I could just look at the at the chart and say six But if I just look at the chart, I don't really know the value of the business and that's why I make my own valuation sheets I study valuation Peter Lynch Benjamin Graham Warren Buffett and I just update my prices and I update my numbers and I get different valuations if a price comes down to a 20 bag or entry 35% Kegel over a decade if it goes to a 30 bag or entry 41% Kegel entry. I'm looking for those deals I Don't have a lot of on my radar, but I do have some 10 baggers on my radar But look Palantir is not top of the list not at 11 dollars at 11 dollars. I Think the the best you can do is a 500% return in A decade so that's what the math says if you buy it now You're basically hoping to get a 500% return over the next decade if it gets cheaper It just enhances the opportunity. That's why we always want stocks to get cheaper We always want stocks to go on sale so we can buy them at a better deal Do you agree let me know cheers


Hi, I'm Myra Sutton, and I'm with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. I got here to Lima, Peru at 11 p.m. last night for the 17th round of the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, or the TPP. The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement is a huge multinational trade agreement between 11 and growing countries, and it covers everything from beef to tobacco to financial regulation. But the Electronic Frontier Foundation has been following the TPP for over two years because of one chapter, the intellectual property chapter, and it regulates the internet, and it's an overreach of copyright enforcement that will affect students, all internet users, researchers, people with visual and learning disabilities, and even though civil society is shut out from every negotiation and they have not shown the text of the agreement ever since the beginning, we're here because we're trying to get people to care about this agreement that's going to restrict and enforce copyright in a way that is going to hurt everybody's ability to interact and share content. The problem with the TPP and trade agreements that carry copyright enforcement provisions is that it restricts countries' ability to design innovation policy that best suits the needs of their own countries. And when countries sign away their ability to regulate their own laws around copyright and innovation, then it ties them from being able to adapt to the future. And we all know that technology changes so quickly, and when we tie our countries to the mast and restrict our lawmakers from responding to the needs of their people, then how are we supposed to create law that makes sense for the public interest? Hollywood and big content industries that really want to preserve their existing business model are paying a lot of money for lobbyists and to impact international policy makers, rather than creating new platforms that provide digital content to users that really want it and they really want to be able to pay for content. There just isn't the platforms for them to be able to get that. And so what they really should be doing is developing new apps, developing new models for users to be able to get content and to be able to interact with the artists that they like, rather than trying to impact copyright and impact policy in a way that would really restrict and prevent new innovators from feeling that need.  So we're going to keep talking about how broken this international policy negotiation process is until they change it and until they make it democratic because we're not going to stop fighting until the internet is free and open.