Special Board Meeting August 24
The following was sent to the Board of Trustee prior to the August 24th Board meeting:
As most of you are aware the Oversight Committee has been working with the firm of Robert Luchetti and Associates for many years. We initially asked the architect to do a feasibility study and then after the initial efforts by the Capital Campaign to design to our budget. Last October we came to the Board of Trustees and asked for direction on the general scope and budget of the renovation. The Board of Trustees voted to support moving forward with what we called at that time as Scheme B – which kept our basic footprint, but slope the floor. At that point we felt that we could afford this level of renovation with the addition of approximately $200,000 – $250,000 in loans. The general budget for Scheme B at that time was $950,000-$1,000,000. At that time we thought hard construction costs would be around $750,000 and that furniture, audio other non-construction related items would be around $200,000.
Design
The Oversight committee worked with Bob Luchetti and his associates through-out the spring to develop the best design we felt would serve the needs of the community. Our renovation goals were to:
· Improve sightlines
· Improve acoustics
· Improve lighting
· Add flexibility
· Incorporate better accessibility
Beyond that from the committee and their own interviews the architects developed their own set of design goals that included:
· Accommodation of groups of various sizes and different kinds of services
· Optimizing lines-of-sight and comfort of seating
· Preserving the warm feel of the existing sanctuary
· Making the Bimah accessible to those of diverse age and physical condition; better lighting; better acoustics
· Introducing natural light without compromise to the Stained Glass Windows
· Creating a space that enhances community and spirituality, participation not performance
Bidding
In late May we bid the documents to seven contractors and at the beginning of July four contractors submitted bids. There were many reasons why contractors ultimately decided not to bid that included inability to meet our schedule or feeling that they could not be competitive. Of the four contractors that submitted bids – three of them were extremely close and the fourth was nearly a million dollars more. It was our sense that we could work with any of the three and interviewed them. Since all of the three submitted bids significantly over our budget, our goal was to find a contractor we felt could work with us to get within budget. The Oversight Committee unanimously voted to work with Hamilton Construction. Since we have notified them, Hamilton Construction has worked with Bob Luchetti on various cost cutting and budgetary schemes. As a result of this process, we are now at a project budget of $1,100,000 for a scope very much like “Scheme B.” This is about $100,000 over the board’s approved budget, and does not include $130,000 to be put aside for furniture and other items. Deeper cost cuts will result in a scope quite different from “Scheme B”, the project we were authorized to pursue. Thus, we are approaching the Board for guidance at this crossroads.
Budget
Many of you will be asking why the bids were so high and why we appear to be so much over budget. The reality is that from the $1.2 million that the capital campaign raised many costs have been taken out. Attached is a spread sheet that explains some of these costs. In simple terms there are three categories of costs in our budget:
1. Soft costs
- Cost of the Capital campaign – consultants, printing and events
- Cost of the design – architect, hazardous materials testing, surveyor
2. Hard costs
- Contractor costs for the renovation
- Items we are buying directly – Chairs, pews, audio system, signage, misc furniture (torah table)
3. Projected Costs
- Bad debt
- cost of the loan
The reality is not one factor is the cause of our current shortfall, it is a combination of factors including, inflation, scope creep (the design grew from the last estimate to the final bids), we underestimated the cost of the loan and the bad debt.
Choices
The Oversight Committee has looked at the budgets prepared for us by Hamilton Construction and the design options done by Bob Luchetti and feel that we need the Board of Trustees’ guidance. Essentially, we feel that the best design to meet the renovation goals approved by the Board. The Oversight Committee feels strongly that this is our community’s only opportunity to renovate the sanctuary and it is unlikely we will revisit any changes to the Sanctuary for the next fifty years. Even after significant budget cutting and work with the contractor at the extremes we can look at things in two ways:
The full vision – even pared down this still includes the most of the elements of the original vision:
§ Two level enlarged bimah
§ A skylight over the bimah and new clerestory windows at the sides
§ Structurally move columns to improve sightlines and enlarge the bimah
§ Slope the fixed seating area to a lower flat seating area
§ Warm wood through-out the sanctuary
§ Improved lighting and acoustics
§ New chairs and pews
Currently affordable version
§ Single level bima – will be slightly larger than our current and at a similar height
§ Possibly a skylight over the bema but probably not the side clerestory windows
§ Columns in their existing position, but exposed.
§ The floor level will remain flat and some of the sightlines will be similar to what we have but will be compromised when the clergy perform services from the flexible seating area.
§ Warm wood in some parts of the sanctuary but not throughout
§ Improved lighting and acoustics
§ New Ark
§ New chairs and pews
There may be a middle position between these two extremes but we felt that the Board should understand the differences.
Schedule
At this point the earliest we could start would be in at the beginning of October (basically we need six weeks once we have a clear direction from the Board). After the BOT gives us direction the Oversight committee will work with Bob Luchetti and the contractor to tighten up the sub-contractor bids so we can have a hard contract. This process will take approximately three weeks. Depending on the final scope of work construction will take between four to six months. There are some strategic decisions to make regarding schedule. If the congregation feels it is best we can delay the project until next spring. However, there may be costs to this delay.
Attached is a spreadsheet that summarizes the basic budget for the renovation. The finance sub-committee of the Oversight committee has worked with the Temple’s finance committee. This is an ongoing process that will continue in response to the Trustees’ discussions. It is important that the Board understand that every decision we make has a different financial consequences. Our conversation is about the direction we will feel good about and not have regrets. It is about taking a stand and then empowering the Oversight Committee to make sure that vision can be achieved.
We appreciate everyone’s patience as we try to make these hard decisions.
Mike
