 I haven't always wanted to do that. Look at this meeting going. Anyone who wants to join, please come in. So I just want to thank everyone for attending today's discussion on our roof. My name is Joe Kramer. I'm president of our board. And we have an exciting year ahead of us, and it's going to be a great year so long as many people get involved and get engaged in the big decisions that we have coming up. So thank you for being here. This is an important step that everyone is here. We're also going to try to pull the veil a bit from our governance model a bit and the process that we have and open it up to more people because it's really vital to have the discussions that we are having. And so we're feeling that the more open we are and the more people involved, the better outcomes. So the board requested the roof task force to present to the congregation today their findings and we really want to hear what you think. And the process is today we're having really public input and we're going to be discussing this then on the 16th of August on Wednesday the board is going to be meeting to go over the findings to really think about what everyone here has talked about and come up with a recommendation for what we feel that we should do with the roof. Then following that on September 17th we're going to have another parish meeting and at that meeting we will decide as a congregation we will vote on what do we want to do given the options that we have at hand. So and this is going to impact how we use our capital campaign funds. It's also going to signify how much value we place on our facility. It is a beautiful place and it comes with a cost attached to that beauty. So I very much look forward to the lively discussion today and. Hello everyone. Hi Elizabeth. We're so glad you're all here. I did want to name that we are videotaping. I think there's many people that are not able to attend today but I think we'll really enjoy the taping that we're providing online. I also wanted to thank before we moved ahead everyone that was involved with the roof advisory team. If you could just wave your hand. These are the people that will be presenting to you today. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm just eternally grateful for everything that you've done these last seven months. I absolutely could not have done done it alone. So without further ado we're in business all right. So I know that many of you that are coming today are excited about what you might hear. You might also have a fair degree of anticipation or anxiety but everybody take a deep breath. We're doing the good work. So what needs to be done to the roof in the building is one of the three things that I think you might come wondering today. Another might be how much is this going to cost us. And thirdly how will we navigate this project in a way that's inclusive and in line with our values. So before I hand things off to Dave Weber who's going to tell you a little bit about the structural issues I want to just name how this project came to be. So back in June of 2016 Michael and I sat down we started to think ahead towards the capital campaign that we're about to embark upon and he created a capital campaign case statement and one of the things that was named there was the need to replace the loja roof as I think all of you probably know we currently have a black rubber membrane that resides there. So that rubber membrane was installed back in 2012 and it was expected to last approximately 20 years. At that time as we were looking forward and thinking about replacing the loja roof we anticipated about $650,000. So it was about that time that I recognized I needed help to understand all that would encompass this roof restoration project and Michael recommended a number of members that could assist in that regard. So in the winter of 2016 we brought together ten individuals who were to become the roof advisory team in order to identify a plan for the loja roof replacement and we wanted to try to propose to the parish what material we thought we could replace that roof with. Around that same time the plaster around the landmark auditorium as some of you may have noticed began to sag and small buckets of water started to leak in. So the project began to expand beyond just the loja roof and we sought to answer that additional quintessential landmark question why is the roof leaking again? So in late spring of 2017 after contracting with a structural engineering company SRI you'll hear more about them in a bit. And searching deep within the FUS archives we began to formulate answers to the following questions. Why is the roof leaking in the landmark and how can we fix it? What roof do we recommend placing on the loja and the landmark and what expenses can we currently estimate will be associated with both of these tasks? So meanwhile the roof advisory team was talking a lot and thinking a lot about inclusivity, democracy and values and we began to gain clarity around how we could and would navigate this project in a way that was in line with our values. So we did draft a charter which the board approved and that guided all of our actions. Much of what you'll hear today is a direct result of that charter. Here are the things that we wanted to tell the board about and wanted to tell you about. So ever so briefly I'll share that we knew we would identify what portions of the roof we would recommend replacing, the factors that have contributed to the building and the roof's need for repair, the consultants and the contractors that have and will be hired, various roof materials that have been considered and the specific criteria and process used to analyze all of those options. Ultimately we thought we could propose a democratically selected material and we knew we'd tell you how much we thought it would cost as well as a timeline detailing when the various aspects of the proposed work would be initiated and completed and then finally we wanted to tell the board how we thought they should talk to all of you about the issues at hand. So without further ado, actually one final thought, one thing that we talked last week with the board about and something that we as an advisory team have been thinking a great deal about is the fact that how we navigate this decision, how we maneuver through this process is as important as the decision that we ultimately make. As I mentioned before, we wanted to ensure, we want to ensure that the decision is democratically selected and that is in line with our UU values. So today we're here to present to you the information that we know so far and then also provide ample space to hear your perspectives. Some of those things might be questions and sometimes we're just going to listen to what you think we should do. I know the board is taking minutes. If you have follow-up thoughts, feel free to email March. Her email address will be provided at the end. So thank you. Thank you again for being here and now without further ado, Dave Weber. I'm Dave Weber and I've been involved with the building stuff for a long, long time. And what I want to say, the short answer to what we need to replace is everything that leaks. And basically, where's my little green spot? Over here. I'm looking for the laser pointer thing. Oh, that's not doing it. Anyway, what needs to be replaced is all the roof you see in this picture. Well, I'll describe it anyway. So everything you see in this picture, the entire south-facing slope, and additionally what you can't see is the north side of loge all the way across. And approximately the center of this picture I would call your attention to the area of the roof under the REP of replace. And if you look carefully, you'll notice that the rules of perspective say all those horizontal lines in the roof should be getting closer together as you reach the peak. But there's a spot where they get really close together. And that's where the roof is not level anymore. That's where it's sagging. What's underneath there is first, there's a copper skin. And I use the term skin intentionally because what you see of the roof is just the skin, what keeps the roof waterproof is deeper inside. So we got a copper skin and we have a layer of tar paper. And then between those two, there's wooden battens, and that's what gives the roof its shape. These, thank you. I can work this one. Okay, so these wooden battens are nailed through the tar paper into the wood underneath. And Richard Miller, who follows me, will give you further explanation of that. But remember, nails through the battens through the tar paper. So what we need to do is take off everything down to the wood deck and replace it with something waterproof. Oops. This is a close-up view of what the roof looks like. And these are some seams that are spreading. This is the area that sags. This is a close-up of the loge of roof. These are pictures I took 10 years ago. And where that bends out to go over the batten, there's been enough flexion that the coppers cracked. This is an example of all the seams that were soldered have broken. And this is where a broken solder seam was caulked and the caulk has failed. This is a view that SRI took. And the important thing to notice here is they strung an orange tape across here. And you can see how much the roof has dropped below what would be a horizontal. And you can see this joint here where it's popping up. And I'll turn it over to Richard Miller, who will discuss the structural issues in greater depth. The roof is a lot tougher issues than PowerPoint slides, but we learned a lot. We called in SRI contractors to tell us about the loge of roof. And then they started poking around and they said, well, the roof needs to be replaced. But the real issue is in the auditorium structure. So that's what I'm going to talk about. Just to give you an orientation to that structure, this is kind of a bird's eye view of the landmark auditorium. It has 12 trusses, I believe. Up at the prowl, there are relatively short trusses. And they're labeled starting at the top of the prowl with truss A. So truss A is down here somewhere and they go back and forth across. There's truss F, truss G, truss H. It's a pretty long span. Truss I is a really long span. And it's what you're walking underneath when you go from the lobby to the loge. You're walking underneath truss I. And truss I has been an issue since the landmark was constructed. We'll be talking about that. There's a little red line here. You'll see that's actually a cable that's strung along the bottom of truss I to stiffen it and reinforce it. That was done. I'm sorry, the cable's done. Yes, you're right, Tom. Thank you. I is a bit of an issue. J is what I'm really going to be talking about. That's the one you're walking under. J is both holding up the roof as they all are. But J is also holding up the false balcony that's suspended from truss J largely. And then there's a truss K and then L. K and L, K in particular, were reinforced in the mid-90s with I-beams. And that's pretty darn strong right now. OK, so that's the structure. What are the issues? Without the structural repair, we're told that the landmark auditorium roof is at the end of its useful life. So that sounds pretty dire, and it is. But we can do something about it. The design and construction flaws that have existed through its history have not yet been fully addressed, but we believe they can be. Truss J, the long span supporting the balcony, was to have in the original design two stone piers in the middle of the auditorium, kind of in that boundary between the harsh room and the worship space. Those were removed from the plans during construction midstream by the architect. Yes, frankly, right, it's the architect. You can understand the visual appeal of removing stone piers from the middle of the room. It made it a big gap open space. However, those piers had a function. The architect also rejected the builder's recommendation to use two by sixes instead of two by fours. We think there are some two by sixes in there, but the truss structure is largely two by fours. There is, aside from all of that, the fact that we have wooden trusses that are only nailed together, they have an inherent problem with a limited lifespan because the nails with flexing gradually slip and the truss is sag. It's technically load slippage or nail slippage. So there's a limited lifespan to trusses that are just nailed together. So we know at least two trusses will require reinforcement, J and I. In the details, Truss J in 1961, without those supporting piers and only ten years after the meeting house was dedicated, Truss J was sagging five inches and the congregation was upset and made complaints to Taliesin. Taliesin sent Wes Peters to direct the installation of a fix, which was an off-center one-inch cable that stiffened and reinforced that truss. The current status is that cable is there, it's doing its job, but it also has bowed the truss by being very stiff and twisted the truss, which is causing the deflection on the roof surface that Dave pointed out. So it's not the copper on the roof, it's the twist and flex and issues with the structure underneath that's been giving us issues for a long time. The stress from truss J is being passed up certainly to truss I and perhaps further, and as it flexes that cable is cutting a channel into the adjacent wood, the flexing truss has caused the soldered copper joints to break, allowing water to penetrate again as you saw in Dave's pictures. Truss K, I mentioned in 1979 and 94 again, was worked on and was reinforced with the I-beam and the current status is that it continues to indeed properly support the lower roof very close to the edge of the hearth ring. This is a picture of that cable. It's a fairly substantial one-inch cable and you can see here as it's slowly digging a channel into the wood that it's adjacent to. I wasn't sure what a truss was to tell you the truth until I saw diagrams like this, so I'm going to share this. This is truss J. The unique design of the trusses at the meeting house are kind of two triangular pieces, kind of a bow tie shape. They meet in the middle here, which is kind of a little bit of a flex point. And here's where the cable runs across the bottom on one side of truss J. It's actually on this side of the truss. The yellow boards, they're not actually yellow in the roof, it's just an illustration. Those were put in as part of the along with the cable in 1961 to shore up the truss. We're not actually sure what these two boards are doing, but these two are pretty important too. The loge is that way. The lobby end of the truss actually isn't sitting on a stone pier. It's on another truss that runs across the entrance from the lobby. So that's the structural thing. So the roof system, so that's the structure issues, which are complex. The roof itself also has design and construction issues, and basically it's old. The structural issues, as I said, have caused most of the roof issues over the years. The modified Bermuda design, as David showed you, is shaped by horizontal battens. The architects design, it's a modified Bermuda because the architect added flat steps to the classic Bermuda roof. The structural flexing has caused some of those battens to actually slope backwards, allowing water to pool and then to penetrate through the copper seams. The battens were nailed, as Dave indicated, were nailed through the waterproof underlayment, and that allows water to penetrate the nail holes. So water gets in the copper through the seams that are opened up by flexing. The water finds its way down through the nail holes and then down into the ceiling. This error was repeated in the 1994 rebuild of the roof at the insistence of preservation architects that we were required to use. So not by our preservationists, by preservation architects. Again, the classic Bermuda roof would run from the bottom of one step to the top of the next, so it's these little horizontal steps that are part of the architectural unique feature of this, and some of them now slant backwards, so this is where water would pool in that area. A little bit of copper issues. The original copper wasn't what was specified. It's a 14-ounce soft copper, instead of the more standard 16 or 20-ounce cold rolled copper. That's probably due to what material was available at the time, 1950. Numerous seams have been soldered and or cocked with a variety of materials over the years, mixed results. The 1994 copper over the auditorium has deflected, as we've been saying, at leaks due to the structural issues of trust J. Elsewhere, over the logia and the B-wing, the 1951 copper is just worn and pitted. A rubber membrane, as you know, seals the logia and B-wing roofs, and I would note that the two steep sections that are over the prowl, the really steep ones that have that original green patina are original, but they're still functional because they're so darn steep. They still are doing a good job and we're hoping that in any project they can be retained. Now, Sam Lawrence will take you into the overview of the structural repairs approach itself. Thank you, Richard. So, I want to talk a little bit about what we had to look at as far as what the repairs needed to be and how we can make those repairs to the structure, first of all, and that's the key point is that's the number one thing. We thought going in that we had to replace the roof, and what it turns out is the most important thing is we have to fix the structure. We've had some just very preliminary conversations with SRI, but as you'll hear later, we're also talking to some other consultants to really hone in on what the right solution is for that. But the leading contender right now on how we would do that is we would add what is called light gauge steel. So you might be familiar with commercial construction. You see the drywall walls being manufactured or put in place, and it's a steel, it looks like a 2x4, but it's made out of thin steel. You can use those structurally. In fact, a lot of buildings have trusses that are built out of this, and that's what we would do. So we'll have to figure out how we get them in there, but certainly the best approach would be to bring them in from the top when the roof is removed. We could cut some holes in the wood sheathing that's up there and feed materials down in from above rather than ripping out the plaster below and bringing in things from underneath. Hopefully we can bring them in from above. But a lot of this has to be investigated further with engineers and contractors how we're going to actually approach this. And of course, while that's happening, we have to keep the water out of the building. So there are a lot of things that need to be resolved. So it's likely to be certainly an engineered solution, but a combination maybe of some either off-site or on-the-ground construction, but then also with a group of people working up inside of the attic. As I said, it can be installed during the re-roofing process. So, you know, we wouldn't have to do one. In fact, in many cases it's probably not really feasible to do one and not the other. That would certainly minimize the disruption to below, which is important. And then the way the ultimate design would work is that these new steel, and in particular we're talking about that one on Trust J, but it could be Trust I. And as you change the load, we fix one. What happens to the next one is another question that we have to investigate. How far up do we need to go? That's an issue that has to be addressed. But as we create the solution, essentially what we're going to do is we're going to transfer the roof load to these new trusses, and the existing trusses now would only carry the weight of the ceiling. So much, much less load and would be able to carry that load. But we wouldn't remove any of the existing trusses. And then another question, and it kind of has to do with that same idea, is as we change the structural stability of certain trusses, what happens on up above, that load creep that Richard talked about with when you nail trusses together, well, obviously we have several more trusses that are nailed together. And while we're up there and while we're at it, we want to look at what the proper approach is to repairing that as well. Our initial assessment is that's not as big a deal, but it's certainly something that we need to investigate. So the next thing I want to talk about is, okay, so what have we looked at as far as the roof replacement is concerned? And we've looked at several. The first one obviously is just what do we, you know, let's replace it with what's there. So the copper Bermuda Roof. One thing I want to, we've said it before, I'll stress it again and Susan will repeat it, is that it's the issue where they put nails through the battens, through the tar paper, has created a path for water to get in. And the purpose of the copper is simply it's to shed the water, and most of it should get out that way, but the real water proofing is that layer of tar paper. So put a nail through it's not a good idea. There is technology that is, you may have heard of ice and water shield when you're replacing your own roof that you put down at the Eve Live. That material would be a great solution. You can actually put a nail through it, but it's self-healing. It would be a vast improvement. And so that's kind of a given on any solution, is that we would put that membrane down. And then it's a matter of what you put over the top. So the first thing we looked at was the copper Bermuda Roof. We wanted to investigate other materials, what would the cost implications be if we tried something else. So keeping that same detail, but doing it out of a painted steel was another option that we looked at. The, you know, kind of the most common roofing materials that we most likely have on most of our houses is asphalt shingles. It's the least expensive material out there. We wanted to see what the cost implications. And I'll talk next about what things we used to kind of rate the various options. We wanted that, and there's a couple different ways you can do that. You could put it with the battens in it, and so you still get that step Bermuda look. And then the other one would be just to skip the battens all together, put a flat plane of copper shingles out there. And we'll talk about the costs of those options in a minute. There we go. So the next thing, so we as a committee were charged with providing a recommendation. We've done all this investigative work. When we go back to the board, we were asked to provide a recommendation, and you'll hear about our recommendation before we're done here this afternoon. So we had to look at it. Our goal was to not just, I feel like we should do this. We wanted to come up with some criteria that helped us analyze what are the things that are important in making this decision. And in no particular order, here they are. So durability, we want it to last a long time. Let's make sure that we think about that. Cost and affordability. What is the savings as we go from one material to the next? Or the added cost as we move from one material to the next? What implications does that repair have on the structural issues that we already have? And you'll hear more about it, but asphalt is heavier than copper. And so do we add structural implications as we change materials? We needed to look at that. The waterproofness is grayed out, and that's because as we started to investigate more, we realized the ability to keep the water out of the building has to do with that membrane that's underneath, and it's really not as much about what's on top. And so it's really the same for everything. Preservation of the Frank Lloyd Wright vision. That is a national historic landmark. It's considered one of the most important pieces of Frank Lloyd Wright architecture and so that has to be part of our consideration as we look at options. We talked quite a bit about the environmental impact that this work will have on the world. And there's a couple things that come into play. One is the ability to put solar panels on the roof. And what does that mean to any of the replacement options? And the second piece is copper, asphalt, steel all have implications on the environment. Copper is very environmentally unfriendly when you mine it. One thing we have found out is that the copper that's used in roofing material is 90 to 95% recycled. So that doesn't eliminate the concern, but it reduces it. Steel is another one that's highly recycled. And asphalt is a petroleum product. So they all have some environmental impact that we wanted to make sure we considered. In addition to the ability to put solar panels on the roof. How does it align with our unique principles? And that's something I think you need to think about individually. What does it mean to you, our responsibility to the original church and its relationship with the greater web, with everybody else? There are people that come and tour that facility from all over the world. What does it mean environmentally? What does the cost difference mean to our ability to do other things with money that we could be raising in this capital campaign? And that's an individual thing. It's important to think about. Is it strictly pleasing? Separate from the Frank Lloyd-Rayton Visitor Division, but it's a beautiful building. We want to keep in mind what does that mean as we make a decision. And then there's another piece. What implications does each one of these solutions have on the ability to inspire capital campaign contributions both internally and externally? Certainly there are people that would probably say I would rather give more money to a solution that is less expensive because of what I just talked about. We could use that money to do some more social justice things. But there's also extra. There is a pretty high likelihood because of the National Historic Landmark status because of the Frank Lloyd-Rayton perspective of this that hopefully we would be able to garner some capital campaign money from outside of the congregation. So those are the things that we, kind of the criteria that we put together. Now Susan's going to come up and talk about how we as the group felt each one of these weighed in on that. So the first option that we talked about was the Copper Permeter Rope. You can see the advantages and concerns that we came up with. What are listed on these slides? We didn't list here advantages or concerns about every single criteria, just the ones that actually sparked something. For instance, the waterproofing. As Sam noted, that was consistent among all of the options. So we didn't list it on the slide. So if we didn't have a significant advantage or concern for an option, we wouldn't have listed it on the slide. So for the Copper Permeter Rope, you know what, Monica, I'm just going to let you go on the project back. So the significant advantage of the copper is that it's the most durable of all of the materials. It can last up to 100 years. And the thing to think about with that is replacement cost. So we know that we have a significant cost to incur with the structural repairs, which we hope that we will have to do once. And then if we have the copper, we would hope we would only have to replace that once in any of our lifetimes. The concern, of course, that goes with that is that copper is the highest cost option. It's worth keeping in mind that the cost for all of the materials, the difference among the cost for all of the materials, is smaller than you might anticipate. And Mike will talk about that in a minute because the labor is the most significant portion of the cost and that stays constant for all of them particularly because of the slope of the rope makes labor a high cost for all of them. The copper, of course, used most closely to Frank Lloyd Wright's vision. That's with the original material. However, with the quality of the air in our contemporary world, the copper will not patent it in the way that it did originally. So the copper will, it will eventually be brown as it is now in the replaced part of the prow, but it will never get green in the way that it is on the wings of the prow. It would also be obscured by any solar array if we were to choose to put solar anywhere on the roof. So that is the biggest reason, in addition to just wanting to have an array of options that we looked at asphalt shingles was to understand what it would look like to have an option that we would be basically willing to put solar panels on top of. So the copper would pretty much rule out putting any solar on top of the roof. We believe that copper might be, would be most likely to attract outside capital campaign contributions because any group that was interested in historic preservation, Frank Lloyd Wright, would be most likely to be giving us money to put copper back on the building and would be very unlikely to fund doing anything else. We have the May inspire capital campaign contributions internally. Again, the way that, as Sam pointed out, some members of our congregation may be very much inspired by replacing the copper roof. We believe that there also might be members who are inspired by keeping the money to do other things, for social justice, saving money just to pay down the mortgage. There can be many other things that some of our members might be inspired by. So we also believe that putting the copper roof on might discourage capital campaign contributions. The second option, the painted steel Bermuda Roof. This would be steel or another metal that would be painted to resemble patinated copper. So it would be the second most durable of the options coming in 50 or 60 years. So again, the issue there is replacement cost. One would need to replace that, that metal would be more affordable than copper. It's the middle of the three options in terms of affordability at the outset. It would be significantly more expensive than copper. We're good. You'd think I'd know it by heart, but I don't. Do you have 26 or so? This is a carousel, somebody could come with me. The basic other disadvantage or concern about the painted steel is what it would actually look like. The copper has an organic look as it patinates. Painted steel is never going to do that. It's going to have just the flat look of being painted. So we would absolutely want to see a sample of it, a significant sample of it before we decided to go that way. The hope of course is that it would look very similar to patinated copper, but you can't know that until you see it. So that's really the additional concern there. Then we get to the two asphalt options. And the two asphalt options, as Sam mentioned, one is asphalt shingles that have the detailing of the Burbina Roo and one is the asphalt shingles that are flat. And again, the real reason to be seriously considered the asphalt is that they would allow us to put solar panels particularly on the Roja Roo. Another advantage of the asphalt is that there would be more affordable than either of the metal options. They are of course furthest from the Frank Lloyd Wright vision. They're at least durable of the materials. They come in 30 to 40 years, but we would be likely to have to replace them. So that's about half the lifetime of copper. They are three times as heavy as copper. And so there's a potential that we would have to do additional structural reinforcement on top of the things that we know we have to do just in order to stabilize the Roo. Do people want to look at this? So yeah, you're about right. Whoever is doing it, that's about where I am. Yeah. So yeah, cost of additional structural reinforcement. And then of course it doesn't replicate the Frank Lloyd Wright design concern about its visible appeal. And we are told by our preservation architect that we would lose our landmark status if we went to either of the asphalt options. I am now incapable of making that slide go further. So the next slide is to do the asphalt shingles with the flat option, no Bermuda detailing. And that has basically all of the same advantages and concerns as with the Bermuda detailing. It's cheapest. Yes, it's a little cheaper. The one additional thought is that is whether these would potentially inspire capital campaign contributions because of the solar option. Mike May will talk to you about the details of cost. I'm going to talk to you about the roof repair cost. I'd start out by saying these are estimates that we're dealing with at this point, but we think they're pretty good estimates based on the consultants that we've used and what we started with. I'm going to start first of all with the structural repair cost. And this is very important. It has to be done before we can do anything about putting on copper and not putting on copper. And it's required for all options. No matter what kind of roof we're going to put on top, we have to fix the structural problems in the auditorium. So the cost of reinforcing, I'm assuming both trusts, I and J with those lightweight steel trusses, between $150,000 to $300,000. We're thinking that we can reinforce A to H with just metal gussets, which is a minimal amount of cost that will be sufficient. With them, we don't know until we get in there and look at them. Any option using shingles at three times the weight is going to require both additional study and we think it's likely additional structural repair. The numbers in here with the question marks, because I just made those up. I have no idea what cost in either event, but we know it's out there and something we'd have to deal with. And then there's additional cost for construction, on-site management, you have to protect the building. We have to look at the possibility of some ventilation, which when added to the $150,000 to $300,000, we come up with a range in here of somewhere between $500,000 and $700,000 for the structural repairs. Go to the next slide, please. Then we have money that we put in for additional consultants and contractors, roof mock-ups. We mentioned some additional studies that might be needed. We put in $60,000 to $70,000 for that. And that's going to be, again, required to some extent for all the options that we're going to look at. And then I'm going to go through each of these four that have been explained to you and give you the costs on those that were evaluated by SRI. As has been pointed out, all the options assumed is double-layer waterproof underlayment so that that's the same in all of them. Go to the next slide, please. The first option is the copper roof replacement, assuming some 16-ounce copper, assuming a Bermuda style as Wright designed it. As has been pointed out, it's not going to get a patina like the green. The estimated cost for doing the auditorium, the loja, and the bee wing is about $990,000. Plus, there's a contingency on all these. I'm going to add in the contingency at the end, but that's the estimated cost. You always add in a contingency for things that may come up. As with all of these options, most of the cost is in the labor of putting it on, not necessarily in the materials. And there's no salvage value in the copper that's up there to FUS. Part of you will see that some of them are getting some money from our insurance company for the damage caused by hail. When that happens, they want the copper that they are essentially reimbursing us for. We're assuming we might be able to keep some to sell some more earrings or what other things that people might want. Next slide, please. The second option is this painted steel replacement. It's a popular roofing material. It could be colored, you know, hopefully get something like the copper patina that we had before. Very important that we get some examples, some mock-ups of this to see what it looks like to decide whether or not that is something that we like. And the estimated cost here for the auditorium, the loja, and bee wing, $820,000. You see the delta there, about $170,000. And then, plus, the contingency that we'll add in later. If you go to standard fiberglass shingles with the Bermuda style, it's about $790,000. So you can see that in most of these, the delta is not that much different between them because of the labor involved. As we mentioned, three times the weight of the other options and both of the shingles would allow some solar work. Estimated costs. If you have the Bermuda design for those areas, about $790,000. Next slide. Here we are. Option four, the plain fiberglass shingles. No Bermuda design. The cost there is estimated at about $416,000. Again, the same issues that we talked about. And our preservation architect says, if you go to the shingles, you're going to lose your national landmark status. You just can't keep it unless you keep some kind of a metal roof that looks like what Mr. Wright put on here back in the beginning. Then if you add this contingency of 20% to those options, depending on which one, of course, it adds about another $195,000 to $353,000. If you see the SRI report, they added some of the contingency into their original numbers. So we pulled it out so you'll don't be confused by the fact that their numbers are a little bit different. They've added the contingency into it. So then we get to the grand total. And this is a wide range because each one of these four options has a low and a high range because of some of the differences. So what I put on this slide is just the lowest range of the cheapest one, plain asphalt, it comes to a total of about $1.2 million. And the most expensive range of the most expensive one, the copper, comes to about $2.2 million. We then have income coming in from insurance, which is right now we're estimating about $380. It might be more than that. It could be used. And then we had originally committed about $1.3 million of a $3 million capital campaign, which brings us to about $1.7 million, about halfway between those ranges there. So that's what we have in terms of costs and possible income. At this point, Tom, you are going to be up next. We have engaged the services of SRI again. They were involved in the 1994 re-roofing of the auditorium. But this time their mandate has been increased to include the substrate as well as the finished surface. And as you've heard, René Dupuis, their principal, working in the newly reorganized archives that Carolyn Mattern has done, discovered the case of the missing peers, which I think helps explain the long-term problems here. Charlie Qualiano has been involved here for many years, working on the 1994 recommendations and also he prepared the historic structures report of 2004. I think he's best known in Madison for being the lead on the great capital renovation of some years ago. Next, please. Now we have approached several other people. Of course, very preliminary, very early on the RA National, Wayne Vandenberg is somebody, a contractor with whom the feasibility and the design and placement of this lightweight truss structure has been discussed. And Steve Kramer is a professor at UW-Madison and he, working with Conner Nieland, would verify and review René Dupuis findings in a peer review manner to make sure that what our engineer has recommended is in fact solid and meets industry standards. Next, please. And these, you see the Fendorf and Kramer name there. These are names that have come to, to Charlie Qualiana's lips to other people immediately, that nothing, there are no contracts or anything of that sort. We, you can see we would need several different contractors and other miscellaneous, any repair work needed, any attic ventilation and so on. And the thought of the Roof Committee is that we should most probably have Conner's representative too, as Dave Weber represented FUS interest in the construction of this building. And now I will introduce Tom Ms. Kelly, the FUS facilities manager. Next slide, please. Thanks. I'm just going to give you an overview, a general overview of the timeline, a little bit of where we've been and where we're going and some ideas about when we'd like to do this. So we've been in the investigation of the project. We've done the analysis of the roof structure and looked at options for stabilizing trusses. We still need to look at options for ventilating the roof. We have some, some ventilation up in the attic space, but it has not been determined if that's adequate for what we're trying to do yet. And as many of you know, we're going to do a proud renovation project and we are going to make sure that we understand the overlap of those two projects. And it's been advised that we do the roof before we do the prow. The work that's based on the investigation, we're going to engage services contractors for the feasibility and on construction and cost. Sam kind of alluded to some of that. Do you bring that stuff in from the top or do you need to come in through the heart's room and auditorium space, develop a strategy for stress repairs, undertaking other related work, installing the new roof. All this process will go through a series of refining. We're going to cultivate congregation awareness and support. That's part of the reason why we're here today. Architectural mockups of the new roof system. This is something that Charlie Qualiana, the preservation architect, highly recommends. There will be some cost associated with that, but it would give us a real good feel of how things would look and this would involve actually taking sections of the roof and installing what it is that we'd like to see. The architectural drawings and specs for preservation stabilization and rehab work will develop our detailed schedule for each project and then refine estimates of the probable costs. Our goal is right now. The good news is that people in the construction trades are telling us this is realistic. We're hoping to begin construction by removing the roof in the spring of 18. Do the stabilization work early summer? By mid-summer, we'll be looking at roof replacement. Do the prow restoration in the fall and then the last part will be to do all the other little stuff that needs to happen, like soffit repairers and painting those kind of things that are related. From here, I think we're taking... We're going to bring Sam up one more time. Thanks, Tom. One of the things I mentioned before is that the board asked us to provide a recommendation and I'm going to talk about that, but I also want you to just to remind you all that the reason that you're here is so that you can give your opinions as well. So these are the recommendations of the roof group. Just again, put up there, these are the things that we determined we're worth looking at as we made our recommendations and again, just waterproof. The ability to keep the building dry according to our consultants across the board is the same. The wall of them would certainly durability and cost and all those things I talked about before. Next slide, please. So, we've come up with one way of doing this. There are others and we will talk to the board more about that. We wanted to come up with a more objective way to doing some things that are subjective. So what we did was a dual pole. We put a pole together and everybody that was on the roof group got to rank every option with every criteria from a level of one, meaning it didn't meet the criteria well, to three, meaning it met that criteria very well. And then simply put a score to each of them. And there are different ways you could do this. You could also put a different weight on each criteria. So if you feel like one criteria is more important than another, you can give it a higher weight. We did not do that, but that is a conversation that we want to have with the board to see if that would help. And as you can see, these are the average scores that we, or I shouldn't say the average scores, the total scores that we got for each of those options. So the highest scoring one was to replace the roof with the material that is most closely aligned with what Frank Lloyd Wright originally designed. It scored 174 points, and it went simply in that order, 159 for the painted steel option, 131 points for the asphalt option, but with the Bermuda detailing, and then 127 points for just the plain asphalt roof option. I think I have one more slide. So, and result was that we would replace it with copper that we do look at, and we haven't talked a lot about renewable energy. Certainly the lozier roof is one area that is an option, but we also have some flat roofs that we haven't talked about that are primed for solar as well. And so that's another thing that we want to continue as part of the conversation is where can we utilize solar panels on the roof. We need to develop the strategy for the structural repairs. We certainly do that in light of what the ultimate decision on what material we use to make the roofing repairs. And then take a full advantage of the fundraising opportunities afforded by copper replacement. We think there are certainly avenues, as we've said a couple of times here this afternoon already, that we need to reach outside of the congregation to look at possible donation opportunities for that. So, one last thing Molly's going to talk about, where are we going from here? All right, we're almost coming to an end. Okay, next steps. So, here are the next steps regarding the process. Between August 6th and September 17th, we'll be doing tabling in the comments. So, we'll have roof advisory team members, staff and volunteers there to share the information and answer and listen to what you have to say. Any comments are always appreciated. August 16th, the Board of Trustees will be meeting and they will discuss and they will vote on a recommendation to the parish. And they'll take into consideration the findings that we have presented to them from the roof team. Next slide. And then on August 18th, the Board of Trustees will hopefully be submitting an article about their parish recommendation for the September newsletter. So, that article will be their recommendation to the parish and can be read in the September issue. And then finally, on September 17th, the Board of Trustees will make a motion regarding the roof project and the parish will be able to vote. Those are the next steps. So, next slide please. Questions and answers and also listening. This is really key to our process is that we listen to what you have to say. We may not have all of the answers today, but we certainly want to listen. Next slide please. So, after we finish here, if you still have questions, comments, please be sure to contact March right over here. She's waving her hand and she'll be coordinating and processing all of the information that you may have that is not yet addressed today. Going back to the listening and questions, Monica has a mic, so she'll be coming around to where you are and we'll begin that process. Hi, I'm Mary Savage and in this day of computer assisted design, anybody, any interior decorator can immediately change your room arrangement on their computer screen. Could we find somebody with those skills that would do a mock-up of the three different roof styles or four different roof styles? That's a suggestion. So, just to name again, we'll make sure to take note of all of these suggestions for the board and then we'll go through the process of discernment starting at that next board meeting. I want to comment about preservation architects. So, I saw that in 1994, the preservation architects said that since Frank Lloyd Wright said to poke nails through the waterproofing, that we need to do that again, and people said yes, people did that, poked holes through the waterproof. In a meeting where the preservation architects said, and this is before we built this building, they said, oh, Frank Lloyd Wright loves the car, what Frank would want is for you to put the parking lot right next to that building. That's what he would want, so you should do that. That's when I said those preservation architects can kiss my ass, you know what I mean? We're not doing that, so let's be careful. What are these preservation architects telling us what to do, and then two, so copper used to turn green back in the day. Oh my gosh, it was so beautiful, right? What would Frank say today? The copper turns this ugly brown color. You think he'd still want to use copper? I mean, let's really think, okay? Thanks. Just a point of order. I think we're going to just take a minute. Let's hear Elizabeth at the end. Dave, if you want to say your piece, let's do that, but let's continue to make sure there's ample time for the people that came and listened. Thank you so much, Dave. Hi, I'm Deb Lawrence. Sam and I have avoided the roof topic because we don't necessarily agree at home, but I had a question about Bermuda roofs. You don't see them a lot in the Midwest, and I'm assuming they're from Bermuda. Has anybody even been willing to say, yeah, copper will last 100 years in a Bermuda roof format? I just want to say that if anybody wants to know what a steel roof looks like, I have one in my house. George Weissach, I just want to know how far the roof would be repaired. Would the rubber roof be taken off also and repaired all that too, in addition to just the... Yes, all of the numbers you saw today included both of the landmark and the loja. It even includes that steep portion that we discussed we might not need to do. So currently it's everything. My name is Neil Gruber. I'd like to thank the committee for the work that you've done. Maybe unfortunately I'm a retired professional engineer, so I'm going to keep my questions or this question as simple as I can. When evaluations of differing designs are typically done, the end product needs to be a benefit cost analysis that allows you to look at all of these different alternatives, not only with respect to the cost, which you've done a great job with, but also the benefits. They may or may not be different. These roof designs have advantages and disadvantages. Each one of them. One factor is cost. The second might be longevity. But with respect to the roof and the use of the building with different roofs, there are other benefits that I don't know if the committee has thought about. For example, long-term maintenance and cost of operating the facility. Each of these roof designs based on their term of life impact that stream of capital, excuse me, that stream of maintenance cost. We look at the buildings and there is a kind of qualitative benefit. We are giving preservation architecture large space in order to allow us as a congregation to keep a landmark, a national landmark, a historic landmark requirement, categorization. I look at those as benefits to some regard. I also look at them as costs. In order to do that, we incur a cost as a congregation. So I think my comment in general is that some discussion should accompany the cost side, a benefits discussion should accompany the cost side. In that way, from a qualitative sense the congregation can also chime in in a more balanced way. We'll leave the technical questions for later. I'm Barb Avery. I'm the person that the Capital Campaign has to convince that that huge, what looks like a huge amount of money should be spent on that building in this way. Because I've been a member of the congregation long enough that I, for one, don't believe for a second that that amount of money won't need to be spent again 25 years from now because I was here in 1994 when we spent a huge amount of money at my last time. So I'm your audience that you have to convince. Having said that, in the context of the options presented today, I'm not going to choose the asphalt in any sense just from a practical perspective and I really appreciate the work that you all did and what I would like to encourage the people working so hard on this to do is to address my hesitations and I'm sure the hesitations of many of the people in the congregation, which goes something like this. Frank Lloyd Wright's vision gets alluded to and never explained. And one of the things that's in the back of my mind about Frank Lloyd Wright's vision is, haven't I heard like many times buildings are organic and he designed them to fall down? So if we are trying to be true to Frank Lloyd Wright's vision, then why are we trying to keep it standing? Just pure logic and maybe that's a complete myth. The other thing is I think that it would be a really, really good thing to not start with the assumption that we are going to preserve the building in some form and replace the roof. And I'm not saying that we shouldn't. I'm just saying that to address the concerns or the hesitations of people like me, expand your perspective at least in your sales material to include why would we do this in the first place as opposed to, I don't know, turn it into a memorial garden that looks like an ancient Roman ruin in Great Britain. There are some very creative things that we could do with the building to honor Frank Lloyd Wright in a different way. There would be a lot less expensive and I know this is heresy. I'm just trying to give you a flavor of where people's minds go when you say once again, let's spend a huge amount of money on something that I'm predicting we'll have to do again in it. My name is Christy Minahan and I find the option of the steel painted roof of healing. I think that would have the visual continuity that would be I think that would be important. I'm wondering two things about that. One is the is steel about the same weight as the copper? It is. And then would it need to be repainted frequently? So that kind of gets at the maintenance question that was raised earlier. So that's just a question to think about and throw in the mix. And then also I was wondering for the feedback from the congregation whether there's any point where you're actually going to ask people to kind of do a vote not a binding vote but just to get an idea of what people would prefer. Yes, so after the board reviews it is our recommendation that they then put their recommendation in front of you all. So that's at the September parish meeting. So yes, should the board decide they would vote on this? Oh, sorry, repeat. Got it. Yes, understood. I think they've heard that. Joe, did you want to say anything or do you feel comfortable? Yeah, maybe the way we could do that is electronically somehow because that would be interesting just to sort of take a straw vote of where do we stand? I mean, what are people thinking at this moment? I'm not opposed at all. I mean, we need to bring more democracy to the process I'd like to say before we explore that option I'm listening and I've been, I'm Herman Falstahaus and used to give tours of this building. I'm a big, obvious supporter of the ideas of Frank Lloyd Wright. I have the little I now work as a volunteer city planner so I sit in a lot of discussions like this. I feel we're painting ourselves into a corner because we're putting up options which start by assuming that the congregation is going to pay this cost and that is obviously frightening to all of us because you can't expect the historic monument of global significance to be born the cost to be born only by one small community of persons so I would like to suggest to the committee that there be a parallel committee or group looking at how to raise capital for a historic monument and that capital the support for the Notre Dame or the Statue of Liberty should not come only from the people who live near it it should come from the wider community of supporters of historic architecture and this is really a very significant piece a breakthrough piece of human creativity and I'll prove that to you in a minute I used to carry this around to show how this roof was created it's really a B-2 bomber and it has an airplane wing structure which gives it strength now Frank Lloyd Wright's idea is what's significant here because it's a historic idea Frank Lloyd Wright was very opposed to copying the Gothic steeple and pasting it on every religious building he said that's totally un-American we need to have a way to make the church have a steeple without tacking it on the top so now the church is the steeple and the prowl if you give tours to visiting international architects the prowl is known worldwide and it deserves to be preserved with Bermuda meaning horizontal placed copper seams but you can't ask this congregation to bear all of that cost so I'd like to suggest we see a capital committee formed and that the capital committee looked at options for raising a couple of million dollars this is the anniversary of Frank Lloyd Wright's birth there's a huge celebration planned in New York City in September and the concert of the Frank Lloyd Wright Conservancy is targeting every building like this one to help make sure these buildings are preserved so we're preserving the Mona Lisa we don't want to just walk away by discussing among ourselves whether it should be A or B or C but we should be looking at how we can get the world to help support this cause thank you I'm Gail Bliss and I can talk about rank choice voting if we want to do some sort of straw poll I'll take that offline that's a way of not saying well it's sort of a both and from today's sermon so you can say this is my first choice and this is my second choice and this is my third choice so that it's not just 24% said this and 26% said that so 26% wins because the rest of them are smaller than that kind of numbers but what I started out to put up my hand to say was have we considered putting a non Bermuda roof under the part that will become solar panels if we are planning on putting solar panels up there because I see no point in adding cutesy details that we will then hide that don't work in this climate if it's really a Bermuda roof personally I wish Frank Lloyd hadn't designed the building and we didn't have to put up with this stuff but if we can get other people to help pay for it, oh well that works I'm going to hand off to someone else but I did want to name that option 4 is an asphalt option without the Bermuda and we'll make this PowerPoint available online for all of us that want to review later I just had one question that doesn't have to be answered at this moment aside from losing visitors what are the financial impacts of losing landmark status this is Rob Savage and I like the comment on looking externally for funding and I thought back to our trip to England a couple summers ago where we were in the Salisbury Cathedral which had a problem with the roofs if any of you have ever been there and was had to be repaired twice once by Christopher Wren and the other was up there in the north of England York Cathedral and basically they were iconic buildings and they went looking across the nation for people to kick in to support so you would end up with the structure still standing so I think that the idea of looking externally for money is a great idea because I know that it will be hard for us to come up with that much I'm Charles Stinger I serve as a tour guide my wife and I have lived in Madison for six years we joined FUS only because having never belonged to a church in Buffalo where we live out of curiosity we happen to visit here to see what the right building looked like so there is a point about the attraction of this as a significant sight in drawing people here who then can discover as my wife and I did the richness of the community which is belongs to this place other two other quick points two years ago in Guiding there was an architect couple from Toronto as I said people come from all over the world to see this but there they had seen virtually every right building and they insisted that to their minds the two most significant right buildings that you had to see an experience where falling water and this building so it ranks right up there is a landmark in American architecture and in rights career that's important I think to bear in mind and one last anecdote from a tour last week which was the person who came to the Oshkosh aircraft show who came from Southern California happened to be interested in seeing what the right building looked like here went on the tour afterwards said I'd like to just sit in the auditorium like we know Wright did experience what it feels like after the tour is over and then provided a hundred dollar extra donation from the team on that experience just the sense that there is a broad community beyond those of us who are current members that connects this building to a wider world and just to reinforce those points that it is important in our thinking I do want to mention and speak to those who have talked about getting outside financial funding resources we do have a team set up as part of the capital campaign to investigate research outside funding sources so I do invite all of you who have said that to join that particular team we are going to have a volunteer capital campaign meeting on Tuesday August 8th to discuss the various teams that have been identified to help promote and to succeed in our capital campaign so please join us on August 8th and we'll talk a little bit more in detail about the outside funding options I'm Mark Schultz I've been a member here or have participated for about 30 years and in that period as we've gone through cycles of leaking and repairs I've heard about failed solder joints and failed designs each time new copper has been added we were told we have an expert roofing company that does this kind of work and yet the failure of the copper system continues so copper expands when it heats and cools and so that's that's the source of the problem and that produces stresses which cause solder joints to fail so I would really like to hear how we will solve this problem or how anybody can solve the problem as to the color of the copper I find the green shade gorgeous in our neighborhood we saw a home go up with a copper roof and for a while it was shiny copper it started to dull a bit but I knew it's going to stay brown and then on another occasion we drove by and it's a beautiful green so there are chemical means to make that modification I don't know about the durability or suitability for our situation because that is an option the copper doesn't have to go to brown also there are alternatives to asphalt on our home we use a roofing material that's derived from a high recycled content of EPDM rubber which is the type of material used for lining landfills it's extremely durable, our product has a 50 year rating and it's much lighter than asphalt hail just doesn't touch it it's an injection molded compound so that potentially could be an alternative as well Tom Garver here I wanted to make three points the first would be that the preservation architect in 1994 was not Charles Qualiana it was someone else so it was a man named Levine from Iowa the second point there's a little plaque up in the lobby of the landmark auditorium it's sort of semi-hidden around the corner but that plaque is from the American Institute of Architects and was given to the First Unitarian Society in 1960 or 61 a year or so after Frank Lloyd Wright's death and of the several hundred Frank Lloyd Wright buildings extant at that time this was one of 17 which the AIA, the American Institute of Architects identified as being of worldwide importance to the vision and to culture and to the achievements of mid-century design and I would point out to Mark that the copper will hold up if the substrate is stiffened I was going to add a little bit on the preservation of the historic project question two in 1994 it was more than we just rolled over we sold the veto power over everything that happens on the campus over 15 years it was called a historic easement and that's expired and it's something we need to keep in mind as we're raising money in terms of what do we sell and do we really want to sell it is this on? okay I'm going to make the comment that I was afraid to make before I know I was one of the people who voted to go ahead with this when we had our meeting what was that in May something and after so James Morgan talked today about what are some of the components of white supremacy culture there are a lot of components he talked about a few of them the sense of urgency that we think we have to do this right now so we can start in the spring and if we do that then we won't have time to discuss what Barb Avery was talking about and things like that and that I have this knot in my stomach like we have to rush and do this right now we can't be you can't be inclusive when you have this sense of urgency and that's another reason not to do that is that if we really do want to hear from our people then we can't vote September 17th on what we want to do and so that's what I want to say is that the sense of urgency is just not a good way to do this whole process which is so important for the future of this congregation and as you know we are a beacon of Unitarian Universalist congregations in this country I'm Larry Fanland I want to thank you for the committee but I am really just always struck by the dedication and the talent that our membership comes up whenever we have a challenge and I think the process they have designed to make this decision is excellent and I'm really looking forward to seeing how it comes out Richard Miller I was a member of this committee I'm the guilty party for the asphalt shingle option I used to be the president of the friends of the meeting house so I suppose people thought it was going to be the safe preservation vote but I have other values and I think this congregation has complex values our seventh principle about living in harmony with nature compels me to really my motivation is to push for as much renewable energy as possible on this campus we are in fact an energy hog thanks to our green geothermal system we use a lot of electricity it's very expensive and it's mostly coal powered in this area so renewable energy is a passion for me and I think a core value of this congregation through that principle I'm intrigued by the hybrid model I've heard it a couple of times Gail mentioned it so I think that it might add some cost not a lot of cost to put the basic copper roof back up in a careful way if we had the resources but not just on the loja and the B wing roof which is a beautiful southern exposure to put up some just plain black solar panels so that's an option I hope that can go forward and people can make feedback like that to march if they choose to Mike Lino here we're all ten years I'm on the border trustees right now and I'm wondering have we considered the possibility of something that Richard just brought up the hybrid where we do one aspect for one portion of the roof and then perhaps something else for another portion of the roof I know I'm intrigued by the Tesla solar roof myself it's come out, it's fairly new we don't know all the details about it yet so I don't know for instance the weight ratings of the tile panels that they have I don't know if it's feasible with the given roof structure that we have but if we just put it on the loja area maybe it would work better I'm just wondering if that's something that we can consider as a congregation also we've done a lot of work already but maybe we can throw this into the mix too Mike asked what percentage of our electric consumption we could generate from panels we have a couple of estimates from solar contractors the flat roofs around the courtyard when they have solar installations could generate about ten percent of our 400,000 kilowatt hour annual consumption about a similar amount another ten percent could be generated from solar panels on the loja and B-wing roofs I'm Chuck even this is a kind of a technical question that maybe was covered if you put a cop a roof on apparently it does not with the materials we use today turn green it does not do that there's a hotel in Quebec City called Chateau Frontenac that has this really nice I'm sure it's a cop a roof why doesn't it turn green anymore is it just a change in the way the material is made so the yeah it's acid rank and to answer something that Mark mentioned before you can chemically induce the green patina and you use an acid to do that it's actually a relatively mild acid but it can be done it does take away essentially what's happening is you're eroding the material and so it does take some of the longevity away from it if you do put a false patina on it but it is good news that we've eliminated all the chemicals that we've been releasing in the air to create the green patina but now we don't get the green patina anymore this is Rob again and I want to play off Mike's suggestion of the Tesla solar shingles I wonder if Elon Musk would like to use us as a case in point where he could have a wonderful building that's iconic that he might be even willing to give us the shingles and help us out I don't know that's not my idea that was actually her idea and actually was brought up yesterday by our youth advisory member to the board Henry who was really excited about the whole idea that maybe we should do this so just a thought every all of more independent so I wanted to follow up your comment about renewable energy potential and the current existing issues here on the campus you said that the geothermal system isn't functional if the geothermal system was functional would you see a typical 30 to 40 percent decrease in our electric usage thank you geothermal system is functional as a heating and cooling system we thought it would be more a greener system because it doesn't require internal combustion and combusting fossil fuels on this campus so all it just totally run by electricity so it's as green as the source of electricity that's running the pumps 24 7 and we thought 10 years ago that electricity would get greener faster than it has it's still mostly coal fired power plant so it could be the geothermal system will be greener and more environmentally efficient potential right absolutely it just sounds like it's more less efficient than they're designed to be and I was curious why that is I'm seeing the S. Rich and I don't have a strong feeling in any regard about what we do with our property here with our campus but I would make an observation that I think as a congregation we have decided that it's it's an okay time to go about a capital campaign that we're ready for that a capital campaign is a good idea and I think when we as a congregation said good idea to that a few weeks ago I'm not sure that we knew what a pole there would be between maintaining our physical campus and the detail of these conversations that we're having today and the value that we all place in this as a spiritual community and its worship program and its social justice program and its music program and its religious ed program and the things that we love about this as a spiritual community it always causes a little knot for me when it gets tangled up with our physical campus and I just wonder if that's one of the tensions that we feel and we haven't said it out loud yet with regard to MGE and their coal-fired work I was talking to somebody at the Sierra Club and there's a major effort to push MGE to get rid of coal so if anybody wants to use that as something they would like to be doing I just thought I'd say it's already a thing so check with the Sierra Club and join that issue Anyone else? I'm going to do Dorit first since she hasn't said anything if that's okay My question has to do with does the range of estimates at the high end or wherever include if we need to install more ventilation in the attic and does it include maybe having to reinforce the structure if we use the heavier asphalt It includes some amount for ventilation but because we don't know exactly what we may have to do with ventilation we don't know if that's enough it does not include anything to support if we don't use metal if we use something else and we don't know what that amount might be because we haven't Mary Savage again I'm speaking specifically to Elizabeth and other people's comments about the need for rushing this whole thing and at the beginning you guys showed that there was a sag in the roof and you showed that the plaster was starting to come down Is that purely cosmetic do we need to rush That's my question We've asked that question to SRI and essentially they've said move sooner rather than later We've asked questions about what about winter what about when there's a heavier load of snow and no one's going to tell you it's falling next year but they're certainly saying you want to move on this I think we should continue to question all assumptions and get multiple opinions which is something that we're discussing so getting a peer review of the report that we received is the next step for us but yes there are concerns about how long we can wait for security and for safety of all Earlier in the presentation about the structural reinforcement of trusses like a little bit more information does that mean the trusses would be basically sistered you build a second truss out of metal adjacent to the wooden truss design could be similar design could be a little bit different depending on load and that's how you would do that that's what this structural repair basis is founded on So my question is a rubber membrane on part of the roof that we are now finding will last 20 years so that's a considerable length of time and our estimates on the copper were for doing the whole roof has there any thought been given to repairing replacing the copper on the auditorium and leaving the rubber membrane in place for the foreseeable future Committee did talk briefly about that our recommendation to the board was based on the idea that a successful capital campaign both internally and externally will get us enough money to do the whole thing if that turns out not to be the case that one thing we thought about is here's something maybe we do the big structural repair that we have to do now and fix the auditorium and if we just don't have enough money we can go for a few more years with the lozier roof but I don't think our committee thought that halfway measure was a good way to start out Hi, I'm Sandy Weishock and I just have a couple of comments first I would agree that we should definitely look to the external funding sources I think there are a lot of people who are passionate about Frank Lloyd Wright and his architecture who would be more inclined to assist us but I'm also very concerned that if the congregation would move forward and say well let's just go with the less expensive solution and put the asphalt roof on it that the extra weight may create so many additional costs that we're not looking at if they're not estimated in this you might turn out to spend almost as much putting that asphalt roof on it in the end and that you might be dollar wise and penny foolish or whatever Matthew Olsen here I saw on the presentation that there's going to be an inclusion of some more solar options and I heard a fair amount of interest in learning more about these solar options and other ones and so the question is when will this group next get to see those solar ideas included in some of the proposals along that timeline when are the additional solar options going to be presented to the congregation? That's a good question Matthew because frankly the concept of solar really hasn't come up in front of the board when we actually started the roof task force the whole concept was what are we going to do with the roof over there and then the solar thing was sort of implanted so I think what we need to do and we were going to discuss this board board members who are here in a week and a half do we need to start a task force around solar because if we're really going to consider it we can't be just we need to do it in an organized fashion in the same way that we looked at the roof it has to be separated although it's sitting on the roof and it's going to impact it but we can't do it how we've been doing it it needs to yeah I think first we need to see what are the options and then both those teams come together and see what are the hybrid opportunities and we do have to think about does that impact our status as a landmark I mean where I mean my question to everyone is where is the status of landmark is it just on the landmark itself does it involve the loge it does involve the entire campus I mean what is our national historical relevance here that we have to all the way through there so we have to think about it then after that we will we have to look because I think that's important I just want to say again that one of the teams that has been identified to work to succeed to accomplish this capital campaign is a solar project team so again I invite you to join us on Tuesday August 8th because one of the project teams will be solar so I just want to mention that we are meeting at 5 o'clock on Tuesday August 8th in room oh I have too many meetings coming up is it E? okay room E courtroom yard court yard courtroom court yard E on Tuesday August 8th at 5 o'clock everyone for coming yeah thank you for your input and we need to continue the conversation clearly but please do email March if you have specific questions that we should be thinking about and we look forward to continuing the discussion thank you everyone