Person A– Info and videos helpful. She wants to know, if this were a vote that said: We should look into what we want to do in the future. I would say, yes, let’s study this. But I don’t have a gut feeling now because there are too many things that we don’t know

Person B – acknowledging that there are many, many unknowns. In Search Team survey, question about church home being accessible and meeting our needs left 20% with no opinion. This survey trying to get a better understanding from everyone. One way to think about the current question is to consider the Values and Visions from Strategic Plan posted in Fellowship Hall. Is our church home meeting our needs? Is it allowing us to have room to grow? Does our current church home help us meet our social justice goals?. He suggests we were to think in those terms when we answer the survey question.

Person D – she is of the same opinion about not having enough information to answer the question. There are so many ways we could live up to our mission other than renovate, tear down, move, build. She knows some social justice members are discussing a food kitchen, immigrant service, etc. Those could be housed elsewhere, not necessarily in the church building. She is afraid once we have a number from the survey, it is going to be repeated over and over. Yes, we do need to consider what to do going forward and that is the work; brainstorming is far more useful than a survey question. Another question: how could we possibly sell the building with all its problems without having fixed the problems?

Person C: as chair of building and Grounds advisory team – today is Person B’s birthday. Happy to be
working with him. Person C – re: brainstorming – that has already started in prior listening sessions. The survey is hoping to capture “heart feel” better than search team did in their survey. What he sees as valuable is seeing the start of brainstorming and dreaming by many members. Think of it, “if we had a magic wand”, ignoring potential costs, ect. He believes the “gut feeling” intention of the question is to clarify; very likely to be fairly split. This is the starter to building new teams to investigate the unknowns and the possibilities of solving building issues.

Person D: agrees that we need more data. She believes once you have a vote, people are going
to refer back to it repeatedly. Using a magic wand, we know RE wing is inadequate – what if we tore down the RE wing and rebuild new while keeping the original church. If we build new at a new location, we will have to move out of town which will also make us less accessible.

Person L: what about making the survey a little bit more complex in terms of options. Liked the idea of considering more options and ideas brought up here. How are we going to find another facility package – not just stay or go.

Person C: brought up accessibility issues – they have investigated a lift and air conditioning which could solve some of the accessibility issues in the current building
Person L: we have a short term and a long term problem. We need to figure out how to handle short term issues with the existing building and then investigate the longer term
Person J: agrees with Person A and others; hard to decide but glad starting to have
the conversation. For her, she is not so set on the existing building. She does have a family member who doesn’t drive an she would feel differently about an edge of town location for a new building that would only be accessible by car. Concern that we are not just trading one accessibility issue (stairs) for another (need to drive to get to church)

Person B: responding to both short and long term. Two biggest accessibility issues are the lift and air conditioning which could be accomplished for about $100k. Everyone just needs more data. Asked: What other information would you like to know beyond the survey question?

Person F  – has done some research since the last listening session he was in. The average cost of new church construction runs about $200 per square feet (so approx. $3 million (KF? for current footage?) not including the cost of the lot He investigated zoning for our existing lots – it is R-2 residential lots. That would allow another building to house immigrants, etc. within existing zoning. Finally,******* on campus is the director of the data education center who has a video on survey design. It is not the survey question but the emotional image/response – different response to “church torn down” versus sell church . He encourages us not to continue the survey question – but the listening process is fantastic. Thanks for starting but please be careful.

Person K – she wonders: are there any church buildings that exist that are available for sale
and in better condition in C-U? Also, there is greater accessibility in terms of bus service – buses go out farther than in the past, e.g. to the new YMCA.

Person F – he researched and found no churches for sale in downstate IL and/or Champaign-Urbana and no recent sales

Person K – we wouldn’t answer all the issues if we were to move. Another question is: how much would we get if we sold the existing building?

Person F – High St lot assessed value is about $100,000. note: Church buildings not assessed because not taxed.

Person D – Person F makes a good point; if we have a vote (survey results), it could be divisive and a possible unintended consequence.

Person G– she was thinking/ If original intent was to give a gut reaction. We are a church that
goes by reason, a gut reaction isn’t the way to start.

Person I–our church doesn’t meet Green Sanctuary requirements, although it did in the past; with
current UUA requirements, her feeling was to fix accessibility first  but that being a Green sanctuary would also be important to the congregation.

Person H– no additional comments. This is a very hard question; would like to get a consultant from the UUA, an expert to help us begin and have conversations. The question makes him uncomfortable as a binary choice and is polarizing. Feels we have been able to do smaller items in the past and then step stone improvements. Could see us doing so with current urgent needs.

Person D– ********** worked at survey research center on campus for years, so there are likely in-house persons with expertise in designing surveys.

Person E – we have Person B to explore and do a process of determining. Appreciate your participation and beginning this complex process. The Board will be in touch and keep you apprised and informed all the way.