Minutes of the Board of Trustees
First Unitarian Society of Madison, Wi
Minutes
Board of Trustees
First Unitarian Society
Madison, Wisconsin
January 18, 2006
7:00
p.m.
Lower
Meeting House
Present:
Officers:
Alan Knox, President
Pat Anderson, President-Elect
Tom Detmer, Secretary
Jim Jaeger, Past President and Acting Treasurer
Council Trustees:
Barb Avery
Chris Glueck
Kathy Luker
John Mathis
Ross Hemphill
Ministers:
Michael Schuler, Minister
Kelly Crocker, Associate Minister
Scott Prinster, Associate Minister
Staff:
Susan Koenig, Church Administrator
Jim Christensen, Facilities Project Coordinator
Observers:
Donna Hartshorne, Friends of the Meeting House
Morris Waxler, Facilities Development Task Force
Laurie Joiner, on behalf of the Sustainability Outreach Committee
CALL TO ORDER
After an opening and chalice lighting by Jim Jaeger, Alan Knox called the meeting to
order at 7:00 p.m. and reviewed the agenda.
CONSENT ITEMS
A MOTION to approve the minutes from December 14, 2005 (Exhibit 1) was made and seconded. The motion CARRIED.
SUSTAINABILITY
Alan introduced Laurie Joiner who was invited to speak about the sustainability outreach charter (Exhibit 2) for the new FUS facility. Laurie explained the charter’s origin and purpose. One aspect of the charter is its emphasis on outreach activities directly related to the new facility that go beyond our prior outreach activities at FUS. Laurie specifically mentioned the “new Stonehaulers” idea to involve members in the construction of the new facility (and de-construction of the old facility). In addition, Laurie mentioned that the green aspects of the new facility might assist in obtaining grants and alternate sources of funding.
The facilities coordinating committee will continue as a part of the facility building process at least through the construction phase of the facility. Pat asked what the facilities coordinating committee would continue after construction. This has not been addressed and a few people said they are not sure what it would do after construction.
Jim Jaeger moved that the Sustainability Outreach Committee operating with the charter that has been presented should be endorsed and the motion was seconded by Kathy Luker. Alan suggested moving the word “outreach” to the second word in the title. The motion CARRIED.
OTHER ITEMS RELATING TO THE FACILITY
The Isthmus summary for preservation of the Historic Meeting House was condensed as requested at the December Board Meeting. The people who have reviewed it are happy with it, including those from the congregation who had initially had some reservations about its length and language. John Mathis asked what cost figures for the historic structure will be presented to potential donors. A brief discussion ensued in which it was concluded that the figures are not totally final yet but should be in the range of $750,000 to $1,000,000.
The parking and transportation study and focus group is progressing with its work. A plan has been established although there is an operational glitch involving the need to get stickers or some other form of recognition of our members’ cars for the VA. The focus groups have uncovered several issues that need improvements. In addition to the parking issue alone, we need to focus on transportation alternatives so that we have a comprehensive transportation plan.
The forum on the Historic Meeting House was held on the 8th and a forum on the new facility proposal was held on the 13th. Both sessions seemed to go very well.
There was a good article in the WSJ about the potential building addition.
It is imperative that we work on effective communications about the new facility. An example of this is the quality of the article in the paper. It was very accurate and no misstatements were made. We need to determine what message we want to get out. We do not want to jump the gun on what we say.
Alan referred to his response to Lee Hansen’s email about what ought to be done in the future to address issues that will arise during construction. (Exhibit 3) Lee is concerned about how we will handle transition issues. This has seemed premature to address prior to this point. However Susan and some others are starting to look at this issue now.
Alan also referred to the draft statement (Exhibit 4) that was written to address the facilities development task force successor. It will address the new facilities committee that is replacing the old one and how a transition will occur between those committees.
Morris suggested we start to think about who would be an advocate for the congregation during construction. The person would be the “owner’s representative.” John Mathis suggested that we should consult Sam Lawrence for advice on this. It is best that this not be a Board or Staff member. It should be a more neutral party so decisions are made without someone thinking there is a bias in making them to favor one point of view to the exclusion of others. Also we need someone who knows construction issues, cost issues and can be available.
Alan next pointed out his Attachment C (Exhibit 5), which is a draft of a memo to council chairs indicating the coming expectations for the councils on budget and other items.
Jim C reviewed the capital campaign committee meeting in anticipation of a Capital Campaign. The initial meeting of the group was a “get organized” meeting and involved discussing how the campaign might proceed. Ross asked if we have gotten far enough along to estimate how much must be raised in pledges, in grants and in loans. Alan explained the rule of thumb that you can expect to raise about half from pledges, that Unitarians do better in Capital Campaigns than in annual campaigns, and that we can sustain approximately $3 million in loans.
It was on January 11th that we first heard an estimate that was not $9 million or under for the facility. That was our previously estimate. On the 11th the higher figure came from the architects. It is a result of adding things and improving things. It also includes “desconstruction” costs, legal cost. We added kitchens, a few rooms and a crossing that is bigger. Susan said we were not blind-sided; we just did not know the scope of the increase.
Alan reiterated that the Feb 5 parish meeting will vote on proceeding to find out what we can raise. It is not to approve the plans “as is” or to approve going ahead. Jim Christensen agreed that the parish vote is a vote to proceed to determine the funding and not to approve the plans. Jim talked about the idea of promoting a building to approve. Susan said we should vote to affirm that this is what we want (which is different than a formal approval). This set of plans is our vision.
OTHER BUSINESS
Indicators of Progress. Jim Christensen distributed the indicators of progress for the Society. Jim said we want to get these indicators in place and begin doing work with them. An examples is the climate of generous giving. We should consider in the growth indicator do we want to include the “break-through” congregation as part of the indicator.
Treasurer’s Job Description. Jim Jaeger presented the new Treasurer’s Job Description (Exhibit 6) Jim explained that now that Jim Christensen has moved into a new role we need to consider what we expect from a Treasurer. Some of what Jim Jaeger has prepared comes from the UUA and the “financial advisor” concept. This may not require action except that a by-law change may ultimately be required.
Lake County UU Congregation Request. Michael Schuler presented a Lake County UU congregation request for a financial contribution to help with their building purchase. We have already turned down similar requests from James Reeb and Prairie congregations here in Madison so it would be difficult to do this for Lake County. Although we would like to support these requests philosophically, it is hard to do so as we approach our own building capital campaign.
UUA Telephone Solicitations. The UUA has informed us that they are going to do telephone solicitations in late spring. We are going to opt out of this (which we can do) because it conflicts with our annual campaign at the same time. The timing is almost exact and it would be confusing to our members.
Parish Meeting Plans. The parish meeting is on February 5. Alan reviewed the draft agenda and other items that must be handled to prepare for the parish forum. Various volunteers are needed. Key tasks are the timeline and the wording of the resolution.
The main resolution we will present will be for approval of the capital campaign feasibility study, as we have already discussed.
We need the “magic number” in May for the campaign, which is the point we need the target of the value engineering process. That target is the amount where the amount of the construction cost equals the amount we can realistically raise. Susan reviewed the timeline for the phases of the capital campaign. She argued in favor of our expected February vote and then a vote in May authorizing proceeding, without having a third meeting next year after the whole campaign is done.
The May resolution will have a “go/no-go” vote with contingencies. Those contingencies will include the amount that a capital campaign will actually raise and the ability to achieve an actual bid at the level expected. A construction loan will also have to be authorized.
A MOTION was made by Jim Jaeger to plan that the purpose of the May 2006 parish meeting will be to authorize the board to move ahead with construction related to the addition, including borrowing. The motion was seconded by John Mathis. The motion CARRIED.
The February resolution packet will cover the specific drawings to focus on the actual building and the spiritual home that flows from it.
TREASURER'S REPORT
We will receive money from the Charlotte Helstad estate and the Foundation expects to receive approximately $450,000 from the sale of the Jane H. Wood house.
ADJOURNMENT
A MOTION was made to adjourn. The motion CARRIED. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Minutes by, Tom Detmer, First Unitarian Society Board Secretary
EXHIBITS
- Minutes from December 14, 2005
- Sustainability Outreach Charter
- Lee Hansen's Email (Attachment A)
- Draft Statement Regarding Facilities Development Task Force Successor (Attachment B)
- Draft Memo To Council Chairs (Attachment C)
- Treasurer's Job Description
