FIRST UNITARIAN SOCIETY
PARISH MEETING
MINUTES
MADISON, WI
October 1, 2006
ATTENDANCE
283 members signed the attendance lists.
BREAKTHROUGH VIDEO
The breakthrough video was shown to open the meeting.
Michael Schuler
commented on the history and programs
that the video represents and compresses
into a short video.
It represents how we got where we are and now we
must decide
how we are going to get where we want to go.
CALL TO ORDER
First Unitarian Society President Pat Anderson called the meeting to order at time 3:15 p.m. Pat reviewed the agenda and what we want to accomplish today.
HOW DID WE GET WHERE WE ARE?
Sam Lawrence of the new facilities planning committee quickly reviewed the background of the project. Sam talked about the various committees that exist and reviewed the recent timeline of activities that have occurred. The original budget for our first plan was $17 million and we knew we could not afford it. We went back to the drawing board and we have come back with a revised, affordable plan.
PRESERVATION PLAN
Michael May outlined the goals for the new Preservation Committee and where we intend to go. Michael’s outline is in the packet. This is a new committee appointed by Pat Anderson to handle the preservation tasks in a coordinated way. We need long term planning and funding and to work with interested groups such as the Friends of the Meeting House and the State Historical Society. The Capital Campaign will commit $750,000 and we will seek other sources of funds to add to that.
SCHEMATIC DRAWINGS
Tom Kabala reviewed the original “expensive” option to remind people where we started. To reduce costs, we pushed the new auditorium east. The first version created various concerns about locating the addition on the land and how it interacted with the historic meeting house. Our initial efforts to resolve these concerns were unsuccessful.
So the architects departed from the original building’s geometry, kept the green features, stayed within the budget, maintained the upper crossing and maintained the sequence of patterns.
The architects curved the building using points in the historic structure to create the curve. It creates a delicate connection to the historic structure.
Vince Micha quickly reviewed the visual description of the plan. The plans are shown in the packet.
Ethan Bartos reviewed the external models.
CLASSROOM SPACE
Kelly Crocker discussed how she analyzed what the new structure would give us in additional religious education space. This analysis included looking at how programs are used for various age groups so we could consider how this affects our use of and need for space. This space gives us many options and increases our opportunities.
FINANCIAL OVERVIEW
Dick Goldberg walked through the financial projections. This included a review of projected sources of funding and projected uses of funds. After the general overview, Dick went over the detailed figures.
WHERE ARE WE GOING FROM HERE?
Sam Lawrence briefly described how we go through the design process going forward and providing the details of the design assuming we approve the project today. Construction documentation comes next and then we go into design development. The capital campaign will also be going on. A lot of work has been put in and there is a lot more to do.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Michael May moderated the handling of questions about the project.
Can an organ be added? It can be added later.
How good are the cost estimates? The cost estimates are pretty good but we won’t know the final costs until we go out for bid.
Will the glassy wall create too much sunshine? That is being studied closely and we are looking at ways to filter the sunlight. Plantings and roof overhangs are a couple of methods to be used. Electrochromatic glazing is another possible way to handle the light.
Can the ceiling of the auditorium be open? Why are trusses exposed? This is being done for design purposes as well as the fact that the trusses provide a lot of support without using larger beams.
What are the plans for the teens? They will continue in the annex. If a future addition is built, there will be teen space.
Vince talked about the future plans if they are needed.
How much parking is lost? About forty spots are lost. Only visitors and the disabled will park on site. Others will park nearby.
Are there elevators? Vince showed the parking and elevators available for the disabled.
How do we dispose of the UW chopper noise? [laughs] It will be better than in the historic structure.
How will we clear this with Jim Sewell? He has already been consulted and we have also consulted the architectural peer group. All of them like the plan directions and they will sign off on the plans as we go. We do not anticipate any issues.
How does the plan address staff office space? The music staff moves and it will allow the other staff to more efficiently using the current space.
How many new classrooms have been added? Several rooms have been added.
Several additional questions were quickly reviewed in the interest of time.
BUSINESS MEETING
Pat Anderson began the business portion of the meeting. Nan Fay reviewed the parliamentary rules.
PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION
Pat Anderson introduced the resolution. Moved for approval by Nancy Vedder-Schults and seconded by Jim Christensen.
Joe Sullivan spoke in favor of the project and said that we should have information about the value engineering items. Pat said they are uncertainabout these items at this time.
Nancy Vedder-Schults suggested we should have information on the capital campaign before we vote.
Elizabeth Barrett spoke in favor of using parking alternatives.
Lee Hansen offered an amendment. The congregation commends the board on establishing a preservation committee and requests regular reports. Seconded by Vicky Jones. The date that was proposed was deleted and the phrase “as soon as practical” was added. The amendment passed as revised.
The resolution as now presented is:
Resolution presented at the Parish Meeting
October 1, 2006
The Congregation of the First Unitarian Society of Madison hereby authorizes the Board of Trustees to contract with The Kubala Washatko Architects (TKWA) and the Bentley Construction Company for design and construction of a new addition to our facilities, as well as remodeling of existing space.
The new addition will be 18,700 square feet, and the remodeled space is 2,949 square feet in accordance with the schematic design presented by TKWA to the Parish at its meeting on October 1, 2006. It will be respectful of our Historic Meeting House, incorporate sustainable design features and employ environmentally responsible construction techniques.
The congregation approves the budget amount of $8,402,478 for the overall facilities project. This is an integrated project that includes:
- $750,000 for the first phase of Preservation of the Historic Meeting House
- $112,243 for the Historic Structures Report
- $6,637,411 for the design and construction of the new addition and remodeling of existing space
- $115,384 for Capital Campaign Costs, and
- $787,440 for Interest on Construction debt through 2011.
The congregation hereby authorizes:
- a Capital Fund Drive with a goal of $5 million to partially fund this construction project.
- the Board of Trustees to establish a short term line of credit to finance the construction costs through 2011. (This is necessary because some capital campaign funds will be received after expenses occur.)
- the Board of Trustees to borrow up to $2,800,000 in the form of long-term mortgage to fund the balance. (Allows future members to pay for the facilities they use.)
The other sources of funding for this facilities project include:
- $250,000 possible grant monies
- $405,716 from unsolicited gifts
In addition, if the results of the Capital Fund Drive warrant it, the Board of Trustees is further authorized to approve adding items back into the budget that have been removed to balance this initial budget, consistent with expected capital pledge revenues and prudent financial management.
The Board of Trustees will hold updates on a regular basis throughout the facilities process to keep the congregation current on changes and progress. The first of these updates will be Sunday, October 29, 2006. The timing of these informational meetings will be consistent with major transition points of the project.
If there is some major unexpected occurrence in the project, the Board of Trustees will come back to the congregation for a decision and vote.
The Congregation commends the Board of Trustees for formally constituting a Preservation Committee.
The Congregation instructs the Board of Trustees to report regularly, just as it will be reporting on construction of the new facility, on plans for and progress in developing and completing the full range of preservation/restoration projects described in the Historic Structures Report and the earlier Isthmus engineering report.
Further, the congregation instructs the Board of Trustees to work with the new Preservation Committee, as well as other members knowledgeable about preservation/restoration of the Meeting House, to complete as soon as practical the three high priority preservation/restoration projects specified for the Auditorium and the Lobby that were authorized by unanimous and enthusiastic vote at the Spring 2006 Parish Meeting.
The question on the main resolution was called.
GENERAL COMMITMENTS SO FAR
Craig McComb reported that $2,878,000 has been raised from 53 members.
VOTE
Pat had the members vote based on the resolution as amended.
CAPITAL CAMPAIGN
Craig McComb talked about how the capital campaign will commence from this point forward. The new logo and motto was introduced.
RESULTS OF VOTE
Aye - 259
No - 10
Abstensions - 4
ADJOURNMENT
EXHIBITS
- Parish Meeting Packet
